Attachment 1 - Section L - Instructions Conditions and Notices to Offerors.pdf

Section L – Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

1.0 Program Structure and Objective

1.1 The Government plans to award a single contract for the MPN-14K Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR) Indicator Control Box “A-Box”. This effort is to develop, test, manufacture, and deploy a total of forty-eight (48) “A-box” units, to include forty (40) production units, four (4) First Article Unit and four

(4) spare units, along with the complete technical data package (TDP).

1.2 Award will be made on the basis of best value utilizing Tradeoff Source Selection Procedures. Award will be made to the contractor that provides the best value to the Government over the entire period of performance. The period of performance will be one year. The Government intends to award without discussions but reserves the right to conduct discussions if necessary.

1.3 Funding may be obligated via a FFP definitive contract for the period of performance.

2.0 General Instructions

2.1 This section of the Instructions to Offerors (ITO) provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by the ITO and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Statement of Work (SOW) and appendices. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered ineligible for award.

Non-conformance with the instructions provided in the ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

2.2 The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale and address how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal.

2.3 Elaborate brochures, documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

2.4 The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the contract/solicitation. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid until the date specified in Section A of the solicitation.

2.5 All or parts of the Offeror’s technical proposal may be added to the contract. Should there be any discrepancies between the technical proposal and the SOW, the SOW will take precedence.

3.0 General Information

3.1 Point of Contact

The Contracting Officer (CO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO at the address located in Section A of the model contract/solicitation.

3.2 Debriefings

The CO will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing IAW FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing. However, Offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing. The CO will notify unsuccessful Offerors IAW FAR

15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request IAW the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

3.3 Discrepancies

If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the omission or error. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal.

3.4 Electronic Reference Documents

All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on SAM.GOV web site at http://www.sam.gov.

3.5 Amendments to Solicitation

In the event this RFP is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Offeror’s shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment(s) and provide confirmation upon submission of the Offeror’s proposal. Any unacknowledged amendments in the Offeror’s proposal are subject to solicitation provision FAR 52.215-1(c).

3.6 Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals All proposals shall be submitted using DoD SAFE, https://safe.apps.mil/. All interested Offerors must e-mail Ashley Brink, (Ashley.Brink@us.af.mil) and Amanda Jones, (Amanda.Jones.39@us.af.mil) in order to receive a request code to drop-off (upload) files in DoD SAFE. One of the Government Points of Contact (GPOCs) will send an e-mail to the Offeror acknowledging the request for a drop-off code in DOD Safe.

The GPOC e-mail acknowledging the request will not be sent to the Offeror after close of business hours (1500 CST), weekends, or on nationally observed holidays. If you do not receive an acknowledgement e-mail from either of the GPOCs after 72 hours, you must send another e-mail. After the e-mail request for a drop-off code has been sent from the Offeror and the Offeror has received the acknowledgment e-mail from either GPOC, the Offeror will then receive an e-mail from DoD SAFE to drop-off proposals and other requested documents. If the Offeror does not receive the e-mail from DoD SAFE the Offeror will need to check SPAM and JUNK folders before requesting another drop-off code from the GPOC. The request for drop-off is only valid for 14 days. If the 14 days has expired and the RFP is still open, the Offeror may send another e-mail request for drop-off code to the GPOCs e-mail addresses listed above.

Be advised that classified information is not allowed on DoD SAFE. Any files containing CUI/PII/PHI must be encrypted prior to uploading or by checking the “Encrypt every file” box. The Offeror is allowed to drop-off one or more files (up to 8GB total). The Offeror may select the box ‘Send me an e-mail when each recipient picks up the files” for documentation purposes. The GPOC will receive an automated e-mail containing the information the Offeror has entered and instructions for downloading the file(s). The GPOC will have 7 days to retrieve the files submitted in the drop-off. DoD SAFE does not guarantee delivery of https://safe.apps.mil/ documents within a specified time period under 4 hours.

All electronic documents and files submitted shall contain the volume number and title. Use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including sub-factors, required plans, exhibits, appendices, and attachments, if any. Each volume shall be submitted as a separate file. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2016, MS Excel 2016, MS-Power Point versions 2016, and Adobe PDF. Note PDF files must be searchable and able to copy and paste. For amendment purposes to the proposal, the "original" proposal shall be clearly identified.

3.7 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

3.7.1 The Title Page of each volume must show solicitation number, name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the Offeror and electronic e-mail address if available.

3.7.2 A Team List of the Offeror’s primary Point of Contacts shall be submitted in each volume using the format shown in Attachment 2.0 of the ITO.

3.7.3 The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table 1 below). The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 1. The attachments identified in the table shall be separate PDF documents, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below.

Table 1 – Proposal Organization

Volume ITO Volume Title Page Limit I 4 Factor 1 – Technical 50

3.7.1 Title Page (Not included in 50 page limit) 1

3.7.2 Team List (See Attachment 2.0) (Not included in 50 page limit)

3.7.3, 3.7.7

Table of Contents/Indexing Unlimited

3.7.8 List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

3.7.9 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms Unlimited

4.1.3 4.1.4

4.1.5 4.1.6

Sub-factor 1 First Article Unit Sub-factor 2 Depot Support Package Sub-factor 3 Acceptance Test Procedure Sub-factor 4 Technical Data Package

Included as part of the 50 page limit

II 5 Factor 2 - Past Performance Unlimited

3.7.1 Title Page 1

3.7.2 Team List (See Attachment 2.0) 5

3.7.3, 3.7.7

Table of Contents/Indexing Unlimited

3.7.8 List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

3.7.9 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms Unlimited

5.0, Present/Past Performance Information Forms (PPIF) Request no more

5.3.1, 5.3.2

(See Attachment 1.1) to include the Relevant Contract Narrative than 13 pages/contract

5.1 Consent Letter (See Attachment 1.4) See 5.1

5.1 Client Authorization Letters (See Attachment 1.5) See 5.1

5.2 Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (See Attachment

1.2 and 1.3) Tab Only

5.3.3 Roadmap 2

III 6 Price Volume

3.7.1 Title Page 1

3.7.2 Team List (See Attachment 2.0) 5

3.7.3, 3.7.7

Table of Contents/Indexing Unlimited

3.7.8 List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

3.7.9 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms Unlimited

6.1 General Instructions Unlimited

6.4 Volume Organization Unlimited

6.4.1 Section 1 Unlimited

6.4.2 Section 2 Unlimited

6.4.3 Section 3 Unlimited

IV 7 Contract Documentation Volume Unlimited

3.7.1 Title Page (SF33) 1

3.7.2 Team List (See Attachment 2.0) 5

3.7.3, 3.7.7

Table of Contents/Indexing Unlimited

3.7.8 List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

3.7.9 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

7.1 Request for Proposal (RFP) (future Model

Contract)/Representations and Certifications

7.1.2 Price Matrix

7.1.5 Representations and Certifications

7.2 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements

7.3.2, 7.3.3, 7.3.4

Contact Information

7.3.5 Attachments to the RFP/Model Contract

3.7.4 Page Limitations

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Page limitations may also be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors. Each page shall be counted except the following: blank pages, title pages, tables of contents, tabs, indexes, glossaries, and those noted in the Proposal Organization chart as unlimited.

3.7.5 Pricing Information

All pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the Price Proposal and Contract Documentation volumes. Price trade-off information, work hour estimates, and material kinds and quantities may be used in other volumes only as appropriate for presenting rationale for alternatives or design and trade-off decisions.

3.7.6 Cross Referencing

The Technical volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for the technical evaluation, which is not found in the Technical volume, will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal, and will not be considered in the technical evaluation. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted when its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. The Past Performance and Price Proposal volume evaluations will utilize information from each respective volume for the evaluation, but may also utilize information from other volumes as well.

3.7.7 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

3.7.8 Tables and Figures

Include an indexed list of Tables and Figures

3.7.9 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation of each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

3.7.10 Requirements Correlation Matrix

The Offeror shall complete the Requirements Correlation Matrix provided in Table 2 that will indicate the corresponding proposal paragraph in each volume which addresses the referenced item.

Table 2 – Requirements Correlation Matrix

Reference SOW Section L Section M Contract Line Item Number

(CLIN)

Associated Contract Data Requirements List

(CDRL)

VOLUME I - TECHNICAL

Factor 1 - Technical

Sub-factor 1 First Article Unit

3.1 4.1.3 2.2.1 0001 A005

Sub-factor 2 Depot Support Package

10.1 4.1.4 2.2.2 0008 A010

Sub-factor 3 Acceptance Test Procedure

7.0 4.1.5 2.2.3 0004 A004

Sub-factor 4 Technical Data Package

10.0 4.1.5 2.2.4 0007 A007

VOLUME II - PAST

PERFORMANCE (Factor 2)

N/A 5.0 2.3 N/A N/A

VOLUME III - PRICE (Factor 3) N/A 6.0 2.4 All CLINs N/A

3.10 Page Size and Format

3.10.1 A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 X 11 inches. Page line spacing shall be 1.5 lines. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than Arial 12 points. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and ¾ inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall apply to responses to ENs. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and paper proposals.

3.10.2 Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementations schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated. The following limitation only applies to the Technical volume. Text intended for evaluation within all figures, charts, tables, and graphs, to include imbedded images, shall be no less than Arial 8-pt. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and paper proposals. Any text within figures, charts, tables, and graphs which do not meet this requirement will not be considered in the evaluation. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

3.11 Labeling

A cover sheet should be used in each volume and clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the Offeror’s name. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed IAW FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction of Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

3.12 Electronic Offers

The Offeror shall submit volumes I through IV in electronic format via DOD Safe at https://safe.apps.mil/ to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), Ashley Brink, (Ashley.Brink@us.af.mil) and the Program Manager, Amanda Jones (Amanda.Jones.39@us.af.mil). Email the PCO to receive a request code to drop-off (upload) files in DoD SAFE. Once the code is received, upload proposal files via DoD SAFE and notify the PCO by email that files have been uploaded, providing a screenshot within the email of the upload confirmation screen from DoD SAFE.

Each volume shall be submitted in separate files. If submission files are compressed, they must be able to be decompressed using inherent Microsoft (MS) Windows tools (e.g., ZIP), otherwise the necessary decompression utility program must also be provided. The electronic files shall be submitted in a format readable by MS Word, MS Excel, MS Power Point, or searchable PDF. All MS product submissions shall be readable by MS Office 2016 or newer versions, and all PDFs shall be readable by Adobe Acrobat Pro DC or newer.

4 FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL

4.0 Factor 1 – Technical

The Technical volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical Sub-factors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying these sub-factors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that your firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is neither necessary nor desirable for you to tell us so in your proposal. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

4.1 Format and Specific Content

4.1.1 Technical

In the Technical volume, address your proposed approach to meeting the minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical sub-factor.

4.1.2 Volume Organization

The Technical volume shall be organized according to the outline provided in Table 1.

4.1.3 Sub-factor 1: First Article Unit

The Offeror shall describe the technical/specification for the first article unit. At a minimum, it has to perform and do everything the existing A-Box does to include:

• Must Function with ASR Flat Panel Indicator and associated TPX-42 Interrogator system.

• Frame assembly sufficient to meet existing mechanical fit requirements

• Graphics processor assembly

• Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) flat panel display

• Use of existing power and signal cable/harness (115 Vac ±10%, single phase, 60 Hz ±5%; 5

Vac at 2.1 amperes; 20 Vdc at 1.4 am-peres)

• Maximum control sizing to avoid accidental presses

• Chemical glove compatible

• Numeric entry previously done via thumb wheels to be done using pop-up numeric entry dialog for ease and speed

• Dark UI used for maximum visibility of illuminated controls

• Sliders dialog instead of knob controls for ease of adjustability

• Fit comfortably in a 12.1”16:9 display

• STATE MEM button to access control state loading and saving

Also, A-Box must contain the front panel control and indicators IAW SOW Para 3.0

4.1.4 Sub-factor 2: Depot Support Package

The Offeror shall provide a method of troubleshooting/testing the A-Box to include Technical Orders for field level troubleshooting via maintenance work station/laptop – hook up directly to “A-Box” for diagnostics and possible fix and/or depot test station where technician can hook up the “A-Box” and run diagnostics check for repair or replacement IAW CDRL A010. The contractor shall provide plans for providing to the Government an automated test station for testing, troubleshooting, and verification of the functionality of “A-Box” Unit.

4.1.5 Sub-factor 3: Acceptance Test Procedure

The Offeror shall provide Acceptance Test Procedure IAW SOW paragraph 7.0

4.1.6 Sub-factor 4: Technical Data Package

The Offeror shall provide a technical data package IAW SOW paragraph 10.0 which shall include all Technical Documentation, Technical Drawings, Electrical Schematics, Circuit Card Assembly (CAD) drawings, and the Parts List.

5.0 Factor 2 – Past Performance

Each Offeror shall submit a Past Performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information IAW the format contained in Attachment 1.1 of the ITO. The Past Performance volume shall include a team list, which includes the prime contractor, all significant subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform the work outlined in the solicitation. The Offeror shall describe the portion of the effort each team member is proposed to perform in relation to the Factor 1 Technical sub-factors, Factor 3 Price, and Scope, Magnitude, and Complexity. The Government Past Performance Evaluation Team (PPET) evaluates each member of the Offeror’s team for relevancy, recency, and performance, based on its proposed portion of effort. Therefore, it is important for the Offeror to provide a detailed portion of effort description, in order for the PPET to conduct an accurate assessment. Offerors shall also provide approximate percentages for portion of effort for each team member. For the Past Performance evaluation, the Government will use data provided by the Offeror in the Past Performance volume, as well as data obtained from other sources.

Offerors shall also complete a table similar to the one below, identifying what each team member is proposed to perform and the percentage of that work, if applicable. This information is especially critical, as the PPET will give consideration to the portion of effort accomplished on previous/current contracts compared to the portion to be performed on the proposed effort (Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, para 2.3.2.2). Therefore, ensure this information is readily available in this table to assist the PPET in performing their evaluation.

Prime/Subcontractor Name

Sub-factor 1:

First Article Unit

Sub-factor 2:

Depot Support Package

Sub-factor 3:

Acceptance Test Procedure

Sub-factor 4:

Technical Data Package

5.1 Consent Letter

Along with the information required in this paragraph, the Offeror shall submit a consent letter (Attachment 1.4) executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the Offeror so the Offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the Offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter (Attachment 1.5) authorizing the release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror’s performance.

5.2 Early Proposal Information

Each Offeror is requested to submit the Past Performance volume 15 calendar days prior to the solicitation closing date. Early submission of the Past Performance volume is a request and not a requirement. Failure to submit early proposal information will not result in Offeror disqualification, nor will Offerors be penalized.

As soon as practicable, Offerors shall complete Section 1 of the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 1.2) and e-mail it and the Performance Questionnaire Letter (Attachment 1.3) to all points of contact (POCs) the Offeror has listed in the PPIF (Attachment 1.1). The POCs will complete the questionnaires and forward them by e-mail, directly to the CO at Ashley.Brink@us.af.mil or Amanda.Jones.39@us.af.mil. RESPONDENTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRES SHALL NOT SEND THE COMPLETED INFORMATION SHEETS BACK TO THE OFFEROR. Offerors shall not follow-up with respondents to ensure they have completed the questionnaires. The CO and/or PPET will conduct such follow-up with any POC as necessary.

5.3 Recent and Relevant Contracts

5.3.1 The Offeror shall provide Past Performance Information (PPI) on current or previous contracts (or efforts). The PPI shall be completed IAW Attachment 1.1 Section L, Past Performance Information Form (identified in this document as “PPIF”). The Offeror shall submit PPIFs for contracts which include all or some performance within the past three years, as defined in Section M, para 2.3.2.1 Recency Assessment.

Request each Offeror submit up to three (3) PPIF forms for the prime Contractor and up to three (3) for each significant subcontractor/teaming partner. A significant subcontractor is defined as a contractor who is proposed to perform over 10% of the total contract value, or a contractor who is proposed to perform less than 10% of the total effort, but is determined to be performing a critical function.

NOTE: The requested number of PPIFs for the prime and subcontractors are preferences, and not requirements. Offerors may submit more than the preferred number, if the Offeror believes the extra contracts are needed to fully describe relevancy in relation to the MPN-14K effort. Offerors who submit less than the preferred number of PPIF are not automatically assigned a “Neutral Confidence” rating.

Fewer numbers may be acceptable if the Government determines there is sufficient information to determine a confidence rating. Request each PPIF not exceed a target of eight (8) pages, although more or less may be submitted, if necessary and relevant to the MPN-14K effort.

5.3.2 PPIF Relevant Contract Narrative

For each PPIF, the Offeror shall provide a narrative explaining what aspects of the contract are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. Specifically, the narrative should focus on similarities to the Factor 1 Technical sub-factors, Factor 3 Price, and Scope, Magnitude, and Complexity, as defined in Section M, para 2.3.2.2 and should be tailored to the proposed portion of effort. Categorize the relevant information into the specific technical sub-factors and price assessment used to evaluate the proposal. The narrative may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the Offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a Limited or No Confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an Offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The Offeror shall clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the Offeror to be considered a higher confidence candidate. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an Offeror has overcome past problems is required.

The Offeror is requested to limit the narrative to a maximum of eight (8) pages. However, the Offeror may exceed the requested page limit, if the Offeror determines it’s necessary to fully describe relevancy in relation to the MPN-14K effort.

5.3.3 Organizational Structure Change History

Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between the conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, Offeror’s shall include a “roadmap” describing all such changes in the organization of the Offeror’s company. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), the “roadmap” should be both specifically applicable to the efforts identified, yet general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

6.0 FACTOR 3 - PRICE

6.1 General Instructions

In the Price Proposal volume, the Offeror shall provide the following information in addition to the Pricing Matrix (Attachment 3) included in the solicitation. These instructions are to assist in submitting information required to evaluate the reasonableness, balance, and realism of your proposed price. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal.

Information beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your price position. All information relating to the proposed price including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price Proposal volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal. Offerors shall not input pricing information in Part I - The Schedule, Section B

– Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs of the model contract.

6.1.1 Rounding

All proposed dollar amounts shall be rounded to the nearest cent. The Material Handling rate shall be rounded to four decimal places to the right of the decimal point. If any pricing proposal deviates from this format, the Government will apply the specified format to determine the extended pricing and Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

6.1.2 Pricing Information Requirements

FAR 15.4 applies as appropriate. Specifically, FAR 15.404-1 applies regarding proposal analysis. Price analysis techniques shall be utilized to ensure fair and reasonable pricing IAW FAR 15.404-1(b). Providing information to assist with pricing evaluation to further support proposed pricing will expedite the source selection process.

In accordance with FAR 15.403-3(b), prices based on adequate price competition do not require submission of cost or pricing data. In accordance with FAR 15.403-3(a), however, information other than cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. FAR 15.403-3(a)(1) provides for obtaining information other than cost or pricing data if needed to determine price reasonableness. Therefore, the FAR does not preclude the requirement for obtaining other than cost or pricing data under certain circumstances and the Government reserves the right to obtain data as appropriate.

6.1.3 Total Evaluated Price

Offerors shall complete the Pricing Matrix (Attachment 3). Offerors must ensure all required proposed pricing is provided in the Pricing Matrix.

6.2 Pricing Support Information

6.2.1 Estimating, Purchasing, and Accounting Systems

Offeror is required to provide a summary as well as status of the estimating system, purchasing system, and accounting system and provide an explanation of any deviations used in the development of the Price Proposal volume. If there are no deviations then state accordingly in Section 2 of the Price Proposal volume..

6.2.2 Estimating Techniques and Past Experience

Provide a brief explanation of the methodology used to estimate costs/prices in the development of the Offeror’s proposed pricing. Where price estimates are based on past experience, identify the past experience (to include the contract number and PCO's email if known if the contract is with the federal government);

explain how the past experience relates to the current effort including similarities and differences and how price data available from the past experiences was adapted to the current effort pricing.

6.2.3 Price Assumptions Used in Development of Proposed Pricing All significant assumptions, scope limitations and/or qualifications affecting the pricing proposal shall be addressed and explained. If there are no proposed price assumptions then state accordingly in Section 1 of the Price Proposal volume.

6.2.4 Proposed Price Reduction per Corporate/Management Decision If proposed prices to perform the proposed effort have been decreased due to a management decision, provide a summary of the reduction by major pricing element (e.g., material, labor, overhead, etc.). Also, provide complete rationale for the reduction. Provide the estimated dollar and percentage of the reduction, explaining how such reductions are ensured not to increase performance risk to the government. If the Offeror has not proposed any price reductions then state accordingly in Section 1 of the Price Proposal volume.

6.3 Price Reasonableness, Balanced Pricing, and Price Realism Offeror’s pricing proposal will be evaluated for price reasonableness and balance for all CLINs. All CLINs will be reviewed for price realism to ensure adequate understanding of the requirement.

6.3.1 Price Reasonableness

Reasonableness is based on an overall evaluated proposed price and must represent a price to the government a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through other price analysis techniques. It shall be noted that completeness is one aspect of price reasonableness. For completeness, Offerors must provide unit prices for all listed items in the Pricing Matrix (Attachment 3).

Incomplete proposals (without required unit prices) may render an Offeror’s proposal ineligible for award.

To assist in the price reasonableness assessment Offerors are required to provide supporting explanation/rationale as outlined in this ITO.

6.3.2 Balanced Pricing

The Offeror is cautioned against submitting an offer which exhibits unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonable or unrealistic prices.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more CLINs is significantly over or understated as indicated by application of price analysis techniques such that there is reasonable doubt the offer would result in the lowest overall price to the government, even though it is the lowest TEP.

Also, an offer could be so grossly unbalanced that acceptance of the offer would be tantamount to allowing an advanced payment.

For this acquisition, balanced pricing is determined with respect to separately priced CLINs or SubCLINs or significantly unexplained price variances from year-to-year. Unexplained price variances from year-to-year could suggest unbalanced pricing. If what happens to be unbalanced pricing is due to sound rationale associated with, for example, the proposal’s technical approach, Offerors shall provide an explanation to account for any pricing that appears unbalanced.

Offerors shall provide rationale for any proposed CLIN price increase greater than five percent from one performance period to the next, or any proposed CLIN price decrease from one performance period to the next.

6.3.3 Price Realism

The Government will evaluate proposals for price realism to determine whether proposed prices are based on an adequate understanding of contract requirements. Offerors shall provide sufficient rationale describing how prices were developed (such as assumptions, historical data, projections, expertise, management decisions, etc.). All proposed prices shall be sufficient and adequately proposed to ensure performance is not at risk with prices proposed too low.

6.3.4 Government Field Support Agencies

Identify the cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) office responsible for administration of the Offeror’s Government contracts.

6.3.5 Other Documentation

Other documentation considered by Offerors to be essential for support of proposed prices shall be presented in Section 3 of the Price Proposal volume. For this Firm Fixed Price effort all risk associated with fluctuations in Best Estimated Quantities, subcontractor pricing at all tiers, market changes, etc. is to be considered and priced into the proposed prices. Offerors shall be held to their proposed pricing.

6.3.6 Submission of Pricing Matrix

Submit the completed Pricing Matrix (Appendix 3) in support of the proposed Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

The proposed pricing in the Pricing Matrix (Appendix 3) submitted shall be consistent with your approved estimating system if applicable and shall duplicate the logic and mathematical formulas reflected in the electronic copy of your proposal. The Pricing Matrix (Appendix 3) submitted shall comply with the following format requirements:

a. Data file shall be .XLSX file format (MS-Excel 2016 or above) or compatible format.

6.4 Volume Organization

The Price Proposal volume shall consist of the following sections along with a Table of Contents

6.4.1. SECTION 1 Include your rationale in response to the following paragraphs in Section 1:

6.2.1 – Estimating System

6.2.2 – Purchasing System

6.2.3 – Accounting System

6.2.4 – Explanation of Specific Estimating Techniques and Methods

6.2.5 – Past Experience Basis of Estimate

6.2.6 – Price Assumptions Used in Development of Proposed Pricing

6.2.7 – Proposed Price Reduction per Corporate/Management Decision

6.4.2. SECTION 2 – Include your response to the following paragraphs in Section 2:

6.3.1 – Price Reasonableness

6.3.2 – Balanced Pricing

6.3.3 – Price Realism

6.4.3. SECTION 3 Include your response to the following paragraphs in Section 3:

6.3.6 – Probable Subcontractors and Subcontractor Pricing

6.3.7 – Government Field Support Agencies

6.3.8 – Other Documentation

6.3.9 – Pricing Matrix

7.0 Contract Documentation

7.1 Model Contract/Representations and Certifications

The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file. The Offeror’s proposal shall include a signed copy of the RFP, which will become the Model Contract (SF 33), and Sections A through K (omitting Sections L and M), and containing the data required by paragraphs 7.1.1 through 7.1.5.

7.1.1 Solicitation/Contract Form

Complete Blocks 11, 13, 15 and signature and date for Block 27 of the SF 33. Signature by the Offeror on the SF 33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. The “original” copy should be clearly marked under separate cover and should be provided without any punched holes.

7.1.2 Price Matrix

The Offeror shall provide CLIN-Level pricing including unit and extended pricing as specified in the schedule. This information is provided in the Price Matrix (ITO Attachment 3)

7.1.3 Deliveries or Performance

The Offeror’s proposal shall be based on the Government’s delivery dates set forth in the solicitation.

7.1.4 Contract Clauses

The Offeror shall provide required information to complete clauses as required.

7.1.5 Representations and Certifications

The Offeror shall complete the annual representations and certification electronically via the System for Award Management (SAM) website https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/. After reviewing the SAM database information, the Offeror verifies by submission of this offer that the representations and certifications currently posted electronically at FAR 52.204-8, Offeror Representations and Certification – Annual Representations and Certifications are correct.

7.2 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub-factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Should the Offeror make any exceptions in developing/submitting their proposal, they must clearly identify any http://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ http://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, price, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of Table 3. Offerors are cautioned the Government could determine any identified exceptions to be unacceptable, which would make the proposal ineligible for award.

Table 3 Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation Document

Page/Paragraph Requirement/Portion Rationale

SOO, SOW, SPEC, Applicable Page and Identify the Describe why the Model Contract, ITO, Paragraph Numbers requirement or requirement can/will etc. portion to which not be met exception is taken

7.3 Other Information Required

7.3.1 Ombudsman

An Ombudsman has been appointed to hear concerns from Offerors or potential Offerors during the proposal development phase of this acquisition. The Ombudsman for this acquisition is AFSC/PZC, located at Tinker AFB. This does not diminish the authority of the program director or CO, but communicates Offeror concerns, issues, disagreements and recommendations to the appropriate Government personnel. When requested, the Ombudsman shall maintain strict confidentiality as to the source of the concern. The Ombudsman does not participate in the evaluation of proposals or in the source selection process; interested parties are invited to call AFSC/PZC at 405-736-3273.

7.3.2 Authorized Offer Personnel

Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually.

Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

7.3.3 Government Offices

Provide the mailing address, telephone and email address and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, DCAA, and Government Paying Office. Also, provide the name and telephone and email address for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).

7.3.4 Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations Provide company/division’s street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; Unique Entity ID code;, TIN; size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation. This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other location(s). List all locations where work is to be performed and indicate whether such facility is a division, affiliate, or subcontractor, and the percentage of work to be performed at each location.

7.3.5 Attachments to the RFP/Model Contract

The Offeror shall provide as attachments to the RFP/Model Contract the documents listed in Section J of the RFP except for sections L and M.

ITO ATTACHMENTS

PAST PERFORMANCE PACKAGE ATTACHMENT

ITO Attachment – 1.1 PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION FORM

(PPIF)

ITO Attachment – 1.2 PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE ITO Attachment – 1.3 SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE COVER LETTER ITO Attachment – 1.4 SAMPLE CONSENT LETTER ITO Attachment – 1.5 SAMPLE CLIENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER

ITO Attachment – 2.0 PROPOSED TEAM LIST

ITO Attachment – 3.0 PRICE MATRIX

ITO ATTACHMENT 1.1

PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION FORM

Provide the information requested in this form for each contract being described. Provide frank, concise comments regarding your performance on the contracts you identify. Provide a separate completed form for each contract submitted. Request each Offeror submit three (3) PPIF for the prime Contractor and 3 for each significant subcontractor/teaming partner.

A. Offeror Name (Company/Division):

CAGE Code:

Unique Entity ID:

(NOTE: If the company or division performing this effort is different than the Offeror or the relevance of this effort to the instant acquisition is impacted by any company/corporate organizational change, note those changes. Refer to the "Organizational Structure Change History" you provided as part of your Past Performance Volume.)

B. Contract Title:

C. Contract Specifics:

1. Contracting Agency or Customer

2. Contract Number

3. Contract Type

4. Period of Performance

5. Scope

6. Magnitude

7. Units Ordered

8. Original Contract $ Value (exclude unexercised options)

9. Current/final Contract $ Value (exclude unexercised options)

10. Annual Contract $ Value

11. If Amounts for 5 and 6 above are different, provide a brief description of reason

D. Brief Description of Effort as Prime or Subcontractor

(Please indicate whether it was development and/or production, or other acquisition phase and highlight portions considered most relevant to current acquisition)

E. Completion Date:

1. Original date:

2. Current Schedule:

3. Estimate at Completion:

4. How Many Times Changed:

5. Primary Causes of Change:

F. Primary Customer Points of Contact:

(For Government contracts, provide current information on all three individuals. For commercial contracts, provide points of contact fulfilling these same roles.)

Program Manager Name _____________________________________ Email _____________________________________ Address _____________________________________ Telephone _____________________________________

Contracting Officer Name _____________________________________ Email _____________________________________ Address _____________________________________ Telephone _____________________________________

Administrative Contracting Officer Name _____________________________________ Email _____________________________________

Address _____________________________________ Telephone _____________________________________

G. Address any technical (or other) area about this contract/program considered unique.

H. For each of the following Factors and Sub-factors in Section M, illustrate how your experience on this program applies to that Factor and Sub-factor: Technical Factor, Technical Sub-factors, and Past Performance Factor.

I. Specify, by name, any key individual(s) who participated in this contract and are proposed to support the acquisition.

ITO ATTACHMENT 1.2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WHEN FILLED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IAW FAR 3.104

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

A. Contractor: ______________________________________________________________________________

B. Cage Code of contractor contract was awarded to: _________________________________

C. Contract number: _______________________________________

D. Contract type: ______________________________

(If multiple types (i.e. Firm-Fixed Price with Time & Material), list percentage and dollar amount of Firm-Fixed Price portion)

E. Was this a competitive contract? Yes _____ No _____

F. Period of performance: _________________________________________________________

G. Initial contract cost: $____________________________

H. Current/final contract cost: $_______________________________

I. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs:

J. Description of service provided:

SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION

A. Customer or agency name: _________________________________________________________________

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable): _______________________________________________________________

C. Geographic description of services under this contract, i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands:

SECTION 3. EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Evaluator's name: _________________________________________________________________________________ B. Evaluator's title: __________________________________________________________________________________

C. Evaluator's phone/fax number:_______________________________________________________________________ D. Evaluator’s email: ________________________________________________________________________________

E. Number of years evaluator worked on subject contract: _____________________________________

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

G GREEN/SATISFACTORY – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Y YELLOW/MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

R RED/UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

N NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.

Sub-factor 1 First Article Unit G Y R N

P1. Contractor ability to provide a thorough technical/specification for the First Article Unit

Sub-factor 2 Depot Support Package G Y R N

M1. Contractor ability to provide method for troubleshooting/testing the A-Box, to produce and deliver a test unit, and to create the Technical Orders

Sub-factor 4 Technical Data Package G Y R N

C1. Contractor ability to provide full and complete Technical Data Package

Factor 3 Price Performance G Y R N

CP1. Accuracy in forecasting costs.

CP2. Ability to meet forecasted costs and perform within contract costs.

CP3. Ability to alert Government of unforeseen costs before they occur.

CP4. Sufficiency and timeliness of cost reporting.

2. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated Y/M (Yellow/Marginal) or R/U (Red/Unsatisfactory) in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).

3. Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?

Yes___ Default___ Convenience___ Pending Terminations___ No ___

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc).

SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY

What were the contractor’s most positive aspects in the performance of the contract?

What were the contractor’s most negative aspect in the performance of the contract?

Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

Evaluator’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to: Ashley Brink, at Ashley.Brink@us.af.mil and Amanda Jones, at Amanda.Jones.39@us.af.mil.

mailto:Ashley.Brink@us.af.mil

ITO ATTACHMENT 1.3

SAM…