Attachment 1ATG GLOBAL MX TO - Section L 2-19-2026.pdf

ATTACHMENT - Section L

Solicitation # SP4706-26-R-0001 – Energy Automation Operational Technology Sustainment (EAOTS) Automatic Tank Gauging (ATG), Independent Alarm Systems (IAS), and Overfill Protection Equipment

(OPE) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Basic Solicitation # SP4706-26-R-0002 – EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global Maintenance (MX) Task Order (TO)

Instructions, Conditions, Notices to Offerors

1.0 General Information

1.1. Solicitation Provisions by Reference

This solicitation, including all attachments and documents incorporated by reference, contains all the information needed to submit a proposal. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to read this solicitation in its entirety and to submit a complete proposal in accordance with the instructions provided herein. The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) solicitation provisions and/or contract clauses pertinent to this section are hereby incorporated by reference:

FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items (Mar 2020) FAR 52.215-16 Facilities Capital Cost of Money (Jun 2003) FAR 52.215-22 Limitations on Pass-Through Charges—Identification of Subcontract

Effort (Oct 2009) FAR 52.216-1 Type of Contract (Apr 1984) FAR 52.216-27 Single or Multiple Awards (Oct 1995) FAR 52.222-24 Pre-award On-Site Equal Opportunity Compliance Evaluation (Feb 1999) FAR 52.222-26 Equal Opportunity (Sep 2016) FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1993) FAR 52.233-2 Service of Protest (Sep 2006) FAR 52.237-10 Identification of Uncompensated Overtime (Mar 2015) FAR 52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (Feb 1998) FAR 52.252-5 Authorized Deviations in Provisions (Nov 2020) DFARS 252.215-7012 Requirements for Submission of Proposals via Electronic Media. Basic

(Jan 2018)

1.2. General Instructions

The Offeror is required to submit sufficient information concerning the following areas to enable Government personnel to fully ascertain capabilities of the Offeror to perform the requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to permit evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the Offeror’s capability to meet or exceed the defined elements as required by the solicitation. All proposals must clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements and associated risks, the Offeror is able, willing, and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet the requirements and has valid and practical solutions for all requirements and potential risk areas. The Offeror must respond to all requirements of the solicitation

SP4706-26-R-0001, EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE IDIQ Basic SP4706-26-R-0002, EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO and not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The Offeror has the burden of proof to demonstrate compliance with all the evaluation factors identified in this solicitation. The Offeror is advised that the Government may incorporate into the final contract any portions of the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government. With the exception of the Volume III Price, no cost or pricing information should appear in any volume. Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. The Offeror is responsible for presenting enough information to allow the Government to evaluate the proposed work effort, support, and approach, and the cost proposal without opening discussions. The proposal needs to be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. Offeror’s proposals cannot simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, rather they must provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet those requirements. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, or can and/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 a rating of unacceptable.

The Offeror must include any data that illustrates the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Failure to address a specific factor clearly may be considered a deficiency.

Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

The Offeror is expected to comply with all requirements of the solicitation. The Government advises the Offeror that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the solicitation may make an offer unacceptable, and the proposal un-awardable, unless the solicitation expressly authorizes such an exception or deviation with regard to that specific term or condition. The Government may consider any exception or deviation to any term or condition of the solicitation that is not expressly authorized by the solicitation to be a deficiency.

To be considered for award, the Offeror must submit a complete proposal in two (2) distinct parts:

• Part 1: EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE IDIQ Basic Proposal

• Part 2: EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO Proposal

Failure to submit a complete proposal in accordance with these instructions may result in the proposal being considered non-responsive and ineligible for award.

1.3. Questions

Offerors may submit questions requesting clarification of solicitation requirements by emailing the Contract Specialist: elizabeth.hanlon@dla.mil and the Contracting Officer shaun.bunnell@dla.mil It is requested that all contract, administrative and general technical related questions be received NLT April 21, 2026.

The Government:

• Will not accept phone calls

• Will only accept questions in a Microsoft (MS) Excel spreadsheet with document name, page number, paragraph or section number, context, and question or comment

SAMPLE:

Document Name Page # Paragraph, Section # or context Question/Comment RFP (1449) 7 Paragraph 6 or last paragraph:

Contract Maximum Dollar Value

Typo

Table 1 – Sample Questions Chart

2.0 Proposal Submission

The submission date for all volumes will be no later than the date and time specified in the solicitation.

2.1. Electronic Submissions Only

The Offeror will use electronic means (Email) of sending the proposal. No mailed copies required or permitted. The electronic documents should be clearly marked with the solicitation number and appropriate volume number.

If any documents submitted are considered Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), they must be provided in a secure manner in compliance with DFARS 252.204-7012.

2.2. Late Submissions

Proposals submitted after the closing date and time specified for receipt of offers are “late” and will not be considered for award.

The Government will process late submissions of proposals IAW FAR 52.212-1. If the electronic proposal is received late; it is not eligible for consideration IAW FAR 52.212-1 and Alternate I. The Government will reject that proposal without evaluation.

2.3. Proposal Submission

mailto:elizabeth.hanlon@dla.mil

Solicitation #s: SP4706-26-R-0001 and SP4706-26-R-0002 Opening/Closing Date and Time: March 23, 2026 to May 7, 2026 3:00 p.m.

Note: Proposals will be accepted any time before the closing date.

The Offeror will submit 1 electronic copy of proposals compliant with paragraph 2.6.5 of Section L which must be emailed to elizabeth.hanlon@dla.mil and received no later than the solicitation close date.

CAUTION NOTICE – EMAIL DELAYS

Submission of proposals via email is authorized. However, the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) has informed all Department of Defense (DoD) activities that all email traffic from Non-DoD sources are experiencing delays upon entry to the Enterprise Email Security Gateway (EEMSG).

Therefore, it should be anticipated that any proposal submitted via email in response to this solicitation will experience some level of delay. All potential offerors are hereby cautioned that any proposal, modification, or revision that is received at the designated Government office AFTER the exact time specified for receipt of proposals is “late” and will not be considered. For purposes of this solicitation only, any proposal, modification, or revision that is submitted via email to the designated Government office AND received by DISA/EEMSG no later than the time specified by this solicitation will be considered to have been timely received at the designated Government office. It is highly encouraged that an email with no attachment is sent to those indicated above to alert them your proposal has been sent via email and to request confirmation of receipt.

2.4. Classified Data

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED.

2.5. Document Requirement

All volumes of the proposals will be delivered to the email addresses provided prior to the closing date/time stated in this solicitation. There will be no reference to price in the Non-Price proposals or in the cover letter or executive summary.

The Offeror will mark each page of its proposals with the legend “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” This includes the cover page and EVERY page that may contain source selection information. Note that the Offeror has an independent requirement to mark anything deemed to be bid or proposal information, protected proprietary information, or other information that is to be protected from disclosure to ensure that the information is protected.

2.6. Proposal Content and Volumes

2.6.1. Cover Page

Each volume will contain the following items in addition to the non-priced and priced proposal data required by the solicitation.

Cover Page: The cover should indicate the following:

Proposal Title Proposal Volume Volume Number Offeror Name and Address Principal Point Of Contact Name and Phone Number

CAGE / DUNS

Table of Contents: The table of contents will provide sufficient detail as to allow the important elements to be easily located.

Note: The Cover Page and Table of Contents are not included in page counts with respect to page limitations.

2.6.2. Cover Letter and Executive Summary

The cover letter should be on company letterhead and must contain a statement committing the Offeror to the proposal and stating its validity for a period of at least 180 days. This letter should also include the name, title, phone number, and e-mail address for the persons authorized to negotiate with the Government in connection with the solicitation. The letter must be signed by a responsible officer or partner/principal of the Offeror who is authorized to bind the firm contractually. The letter must also contain a statement that the proposal meets the specifications of each subsection of the solicitation, the Offeror is willingly and knowingly providing a proposal to enter into a Firm Fixed Price contract award and intends to perform a completion-type contract IAW FAR 16.202. If the Offeror’s proposal includes any exceptions, deviations, qualifications (also known as ground rules and assumptions), or requests to tailor FAR 52.212-4 or any other term of the solicitation, the Offeror will submit a Bid with Exception and the Offeror’s cover letter will identify such exceptions, etc. with specificity. See Note 2 below.

An Executive Summary of the Offeror’s entire proposal is required. This summary will not be evaluated but will be used to gain an understanding of the overall proposal contents. It should identify and highlight significant features of the proposal and include the salient points contained in the various volumes and chapters. The Executive Summary should be brief in length and will not include any price-related information.

The following format should be followed in developing the summary:

1. General Information (see Note 1)

2. A brief overview of the Offeror’s Proposal Volumes

3. Solicitation Qualifications/Deviations (see Note 2)

Note 1: The General Information section of the Executive Summary should include the following information:

a) Company name and address

b) Company Taxpayer Identification Number

c) Dun and Bradstreet number

d) CAGE code

e) The name, phone number, and e-mail address for the authorized company negotiator relative to the proposal.

Note 2: Solicitation exceptions and deviations are proposals that differ from the requirements contained in the Request for Proposal, Performance Statement (PWS), and resultant contract terms and conditions.

Exceptions, deviations, qualifications (also known as ground rules and assumptions), or requests to tailor a term may cause proposals to be considered non-responsive and unacceptable. Offerors must address such exceptions, deviations, qualifications, or requests to tailor a term in the Executive Summary and provide a detailed description within their proposal. Offeror’s requests for exceptions, deviations, qualifications, or request to tailor a term must clearly indicate the firm’s difficulty with the applicable requirement. Exceptions, deviations, qualifications, or requests to tailor a term that appear in the proposal, but are not identified in the Executive Summary, will be ignored and will not be included in any resultant award. Offeror’s exceptions, deviations, qualifications, or requests to tailor a term may be addressed during discussions, but the Government reserves the right to award without discussion and proposals with an exception may be rendered un-awardable.

2.6.3. Additional Information and Solicitation Amendments (if Applicable)

If an Offeror needs information to submit a complete proposal and it was not contained in the Solicitation, attachments, or other data provided by the Government, the Offeror must request this information during the open question period of this solicitation.

If any amendments are issued to the solicitation, the Offeror must include an acknowledgment of the amendments in their proposal. This information should include the applicable Volume of the proposal as an additional chapter. Please refer to the Volume Structure section for details.

2.6.4. Evaluation Factors

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposals using the factors:

• Part 1: EAOTS ATG, IAS, and OPE IDIQ Basic o Factor 1A: Management Approach o Factor 2A: Past Performance

• Part 2: EAOTS ATG, IAS, and OPE IDIQ Global MX TO o Factor 1B: Technical Approach Subfactor 1B1: Global MX Technical Approach Subfactor 1B2: Quality Control Plan (QCP) Subfactor 1B3: Staffing Plan & Key Personnel o Factor 2B: Past Performance o Factor 3B: Small Business Participation o Factor 4B: Price

2.6.5. Volume Structure

Proposals submitted will be contained in separate volumes with any factors separated into individual chapters staying within the appropriate page limitations. Page limitations for each volume, if any, are also specified in the table below. Title and table of contents pages do not count towards page limit.

Proposal pages beyond the specified maximum limit will NOT be reviewed as part of the evaluation.

The Offeror will provide an independent response for each factor. Information provided in one factor response will not be considered in a differing factor response. Offers that do not follow the volume structure indicated below may not be evaluated or further considered for award.

List of volumes and factors are as follows:

a. Part 1: EAOTS ATG/ IAS/OPE IDIQ Basic Proposal:

Volume Chapter Page Limit Format Copies Required

Introduction Cover Letter / Executive Summary, Exceptions, Deviations, Glossary, Index

5 Pages PDF 1 Electronic copy

Introduction Solicitation Amendments Acknowledgment (if applicable)

No Limit PDF 1 Electronic copy

Vol IA – Non-Price Proposal Refer to Section 3.0

Factor 1A: Management Approach 30 Pages PDF 1 Electronic copy

Volume Chapter Page Limit Format Copies Required

Vol IIA – Non-Price Proposal Refer to Section 3.0

Factor 2A: Past Performance

15 Pages*

*Does not include Past

Performance

Questionnaires

PDF 1 Electronic copy

Table 2 – EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE IDIQ Basic Proposal Volumes, Chapters, Page Limits, Format, and Copies Required

b. Part 2: EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO Proposal:

Volume Chapter Page Limit Format Copies Required

Introduction Cover Letter / Executive Summary, Exceptions, Deviations, Glossary, Index

5 Pages PDF 1 Electronic copy

Introduction Solicitation Amendments Acknowledgment (if applicable)

No Limit PDF 1 Electronic copy

Vol IB - Non-Price Proposal Refer to Section 3.0

Factor 1B: Technical Approach

-Subfactor 1B1: Global MX Technical Approach

-Subfactor 1B2: Quality Control Plan

(QCP)

-Subfactor 1B3: Staffing Plan & Key Personnel

50 Pages**

** Does not include

Key Personnel

Resumes

PDF 1 Electronic

Volume Chapter Page Limit Format Copies Required

Vol IIB - Non-Price Proposal Refer to

Factor 2B: Past Performance

N/A***

*** Past

Performance information submitted for IDIQ

Basic evaluation will be used for TO evaluation

N/A N/A

Vol III Non-Price Proposal Refer to Section 3.0

Factor 3B: Small Business Participation

10 Pages PDF 1 Electronic

Vol IV Price Proposal Refer to

Factor 4B: Price

No Limit

MS

Excel And

PDF

1 Electronic copy

Table 3 – EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO Proposal Volumes, Chapters, Page Limits, Format, and Copies Required

Note 1: All exceptions, deviations, qualifications (also known as ground rules and assumptions), or requests to tailor a term must be included in the Introduction Volume: Cover Letter & Executive Summary.

Note 2: Any spreadsheet information such as calculations must be on functional MS Excel spreadsheet(s) (e.g. total column utilizes equation that sums appropriate lower-level items).

Note 3: The Offeror is responsible for providing adequate documentation to enable a thorough evaluation of their proposals.

Note 4: The Offeror’s Past Performance Questionnaires and Key Personnel Resumes will not be included in the total page count for the proposal.

Note 5: Written proposals must be formatted using a Times New Roman 12 pt. 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 should be numbered with section and page numbers. When foldout pages are used they must not exceed 11 x 17 inches and will be counted as 1 page. Drawings may be provided separately and may be any size but should be folded to approximately 8.5 x 11 inch standard size and will count as 1 page. Graphs will be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt. font and should contain a grid, which allows values to be read directly from the graph to the same accuracy that a 10 x 10 to the ½ inch grid provides. Graphic resolution, including such data as tables or charts, should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented.

3.0 Evaluation Factor Submission Requirements

Evaluation factors are described in Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award of the solicitation. An Offeror’s proposal will include all information necessary for evaluation as described in Evaluation Factors for Award. In addition, specific submission requirements for certain items are described below.

The Offeror will use all Government provided documents including the PWS and its enclosures, appendices, attachments, and technical exhibits to respond to Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4 and their applicable Subfactors. The quality of organization and attention to detail reflected in the Offeror’s proposal will be considered to be an indication of the quality of organization and level of capability during contract performance by the Government.

3.1. Part 1: EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE IDIQ Basic

3.1.1. Factor 1A: Management Approach

This factor evaluates the soundness of the Offeror’s corporate administrative competency to obtain, organize, orchestrate, and oversee the necessary resources to successfully complete work under the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE IDIQ contract. The Government will review and assess the Offeror’s Program Management Plan (PMP) to determine the Offeror possesses a concise, logical, rational, and systematic method for ensuring compliance with the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Basic IDIQ PWS. The PMP must be logically structured (e.g. contain a table of contents, page numbers, sections / subsections, references, etc.) and at a minimum contain:

a. Corporate Organizational Structure : A summary description with applicable figures or charts demonstrating a corporate organizational structure that logically provides for adequate resource planning and oversight for a contract of this size and scope.

b. Task Order Management Approach: A narrative description of the methods the contractor will use for managing multiple and concurrent task orders, including the processes for resource allocation, deconfliction, and ensuring continuity of operations if staff/personnel changes occur.

c. Subcontractor and Vendor Management: A description of the methods for managing subcontractors, vendors, and suppliers, including how the prime contractor will ensure flow-down of Government requirements.

d. Corporate Risk / Issue Management: A narrative description with applicable figures or charts on how the contractor will identify, control, manage, and elevate to the Government risks or issues throughout contract execution. This must include methods to control cost, prevent scope creep, and minimize requests for equitable adjustment (REAs). This section should not identify any specific risks or issues. Instead, it must describe the corporate system and methodology to address and escalate risks or issues to ensure successful work performance.

e. Corporate Stakeholder Communications: A narrative description of the methods the contractor will use for enterprise-level stakeholder identification, engagement, and communications with the Government Program Management Office (PMO).

f. Corporate Quality Management Framework: A narrative description of the overarching corporate quality management policy and framework. This section should not be a detailed Quality Control Plan (QCP). Instead, it must describe the corporate system and methodology for ensuring that a compliant and effective, task-order-specific QCP is developed, implemented, and monitored for every TO issued under the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE IDIQ contract. It must describe the corporate management structure that provides quality oversight for all projects.

3.1.2. Factor 2A: Past Performance

Compliant with DFARS PGI 215.3, paragraph 3.1.3. the Government will perform a past performance evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal. The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the Offeror performed on prior contracts by such indicators as the organization’s history of successfully completing projects, history of producing high-quality reports and deliverables, commitment to customer satisfaction, and history of staying on schedule and within budget.

The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance will be considered. These will be combined to establish a performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror. There are three aspects contributing to the performance confidence assessment rating for the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information):

a. Recency: The Government will first evaluate the Offeror’s past performance references to determine their recency. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information.

b. Relevance: After evaluating the recency aspect, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance references to determine their relevance to this acquisition. The relevancy assessment will consider the Offeror’s past performance information based on similarity to the dollar value, https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA000740-22-DPC.pdf https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-15#FAR_15_305__d923e32 scope and magnitude of effort, and complexities to the solicitation. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

c. Quality: After evaluating the recency and relevancy aspects, the Government will establish the overall quality of the Offeror’s past performance. The quality aspect of the Government’s performance evaluation is to determine how well the Offeror performed on prior contracts by such indicators as the organization’s history of successful completion of projects; history of producing high-quality reports and deliverables; commitment to customer satisfaction; and history of staying on schedule and within budget. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

The past performance evaluation of these aspects will primarily be based on information provided in Past Performance Questionnaires provided with the Offeror’s proposal. The Offeror will list at least 3 and up to 5 contracts/task orders in progress or completed within the past five (5) years for work similar in size, scope, and complexity, specifically list work similar to the requirements outlined in the PWS;

provided to either Government agencies or the private sector. The Offeror will include the name, address, point of contact, current telephone number, e-mail address, dollar value, period of performance and a brief description of work. The Offeror will discuss the similarities and differences between the proposed effort and contract being referenced. The proposal will, at a minimum, include a narrative that describes the following for each contract cited:

• Scale of prior work performed, and complexity of work are relevant to the requirements of the PWS. Specify contracts for Government or private sector.

• Describe any significant problems or issues that occurred during performance of the contract and how issues were resolved.

• The Offeror will ensure that information presented for contact points is accurate and current (i.e., current phone number, titles, etc.) The Government may or may not attempt to track down reference data in cases where inaccurate data is presented. Any past performance information presented by the Offeror that cannot be verified will not be evaluated.

The Government may independently contact the Offeror’s prior customers or verify past performance through databases such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS). If the Government’s information conflicts with assertions made in the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror will be asked to clarify the information. However, in arriving at a past performance confidence assessment rating, the Government will assess delivery and quality history obtained from the SPRS for the applicable category of the product(s) or service(s) being procured utilizing the Federal Supply Class (FSC) and/or the North American Industry Classification System

(NAICS) code. The Government may also consider general trends of an Offeror in the areas of on-time delivery and/or quality that may not be reflected in the SPRS for a particular FSC/NAICS. The Government may also assess ratings based on information obtained from past Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) assessments from contract actions containing similar scope and / or breadth of work. The Government may also assess information obtained from past Contract Business Analysis Repository (CBAR) assessments from contract actions containing similar scopes and magnitude of work. The Government may also consider information from various other sources such as contracting agency experience with the contractor, contract history available from Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), etc.

If negative information is assessed using any of the past performance evaluation tools, or the contracting agency's own experience impacts the evaluation, the affected Offeror may be given the opportunity to discuss that information.

3.2. Part 2: EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO

3.2.1. Factor 1B: Technical Approach

This factor evaluates the Offeror’s proposed technical and management solution to successfully perform the work described in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS. The Government will review and assess the Offeror's narratives for the Technical Approach, Quality Control Plan (QCP), and Staffing Plan & Key Personnel to determine if the proposed solution is thorough, logical, and presents an executable plan that demonstrates a complete understanding of the Task Order requirements. The Technical Approach, Quality Control Plan (QCP), and Staffing Plan must be logically structured (e.g.

contain a table of contents, page numbers, sections / subsections, references, etc.) and at a minimum contain:

3.2.1.1. Subfactor 1B1: Global MX Technical Approach

The Offeror must provide a narrative Work Plan with sufficient detail to provide a complete understanding of the contractor’s technical approach for rendering the necessary supplies and services to meet the Government’s desired outcomes for the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO. The work plan must account for all requirements, tasks, and subtasks contained within the TO PWS including:

a. Transition-In / Out: A description of the Offeror’s technical approach to rendering transition-in and transition-out services for the ATG/IAS/OPE MX to fulfill the Government’s requirements as described in the PWS. The Offeror’s technical approach must include (but is not limited to) information describing their framework to perform knowledge transfer (tacit and explicit), coordinating with the Government and third-party contractors, accepting or relinquishing responsibilities for key personnel, reassignment of SNOW cases, and shifting contractual obligations for work performance.

b. Preventative Maintenance (PM): A description of the Offeror’s technical approach to rendering PM supplies and services for the ATG/IAS/OPE program to fulfill the Government’s requirements as described in the PWS. The Offeror’s technical approach must include (but is not limited to) information describing their framework to perform PM planning and coordination, render PM services, and generate applicable PM technical documentation.

c. Technical Support: A description of the Offeror’s technical approach to rendering technical support for the ATG/IAS/OPE program to fulfill the Government’s requirements as described in the PWS.

The Offeror’s technical approach must include (but is not limited to) information describing their framework to perform technical support team services, render technical support team CM/repair planning and coordination, and generate applicable technical support team documentation.

d. Corrective Maintenance (CM) / Repair: A description of the Offeror’s technical approach to rendering CM / repair supplies and services for the ATG/IAS/OPE program to fulfill the Government’s requirements as described in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS. The Offeror’s technical approach must include (but is not limited to) information describing their framework to provide CM / repair supplies, render CM / repair services, and generate applicable CM / repair technical documentation.

e. Key Framing Assumptions: Any contractor key framing assumptions associated with their proposed technical approach and performance of the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX services.

f. Critical Risk Identification: Identification (including if/then statements with likelihood and consequences) of any critical risks known to the contractor at the time of proposal that could significantly impact successful contract performance for the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO.

3.2.1.2. Subfactor 1B2: Quality Control Plan (QCP)

The Offeror must submit a QCP specific to the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO that provides a detailed narrative description with applicable figures or charts of the plans, processes, and methods the contractor will use to meet the performance standards identified in the TO PWS. This description must provide details on how the contractor will support Government oversight and implement QC processes to deliver the Government’s desired outcomes, including (but not limited to):

a. Inspection System: The contractor’s approach to QC that will identify, prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of defective supplies or services, including methods, tools, and techniques for QC/QA activities such as 100% inspection, random/periodic sampling, peer reviews, and independent verification and validation (IV&V).

b. Performance Monitoring and Adherence: The contractor’s methods of compliance with the Government Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). This information must include specific details on how the contractor will adhere to and monitor performance against the performance standards, Key Performance Indicators (KPI), and Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) defined in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS.

c. Non-Conformity: The contractor's methods for addressing non-conformity of supplies or services identified by the Government.

3.2.1.3. Subfactor 1B3: Staffing Plan & Key Personnel

The Offeror must detail their staffing approach for the ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO. This section must include:

a. Organizational Structure: A summary description with applicable figures or charts demonstrating the proposed organizational structure to complete the tasks and requirements in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS. This includes identifying the logical hierarchy (including roles/responsibilities) and clear identification of the organizational placement for all Key Personnel.

b. Staff Changes and Training: The methods the Offeror will use to supplement resourcing if staff/personnel changes occur to ensure continuity of operations and successful work performance.

This also will include description of how the Offeror will maintain training and applicable certifications for staff/personnel based upon the requirements described in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS.

c. TO Level Labor Identification: Identification of all labor categories/types (i.e. both key and non-key personnel) and subcontractors, vendors, or suppliers intended for use to perform the tasks described in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS. The Offeror must specify which tasks from the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS will be performed by the prime contractor versus other entities.

d. TO Level Essential / Key Personnel: The resumes and applicable supporting documentation

(including certifications) for all proposed Key Personnel identified in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS. The Offeror must ensure all resumes and applicable supporting documentation does not contain any Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) including (but not limited to) Personally Identifiable Information (PII).

i. For each essential/key personnel labor category or position, identification of which individual(s) are anticipated to be a full-time, part-time, matrixed, or a split resource (i.e. not a full-time equivalent (FTE)/dedicated to the performance of work described in the PWS).

ii. The resumes of Key Personnel must provide a clear demonstration that the proposed resources meet or exceed the education, qualification, and experience requirements described in the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO PWS.

1. The Offeror must ensure that all Key Personnel possess eligibility for applicable personnel security clearance investigations and can obtain a Common Access Card (CAC).

iii. The Offeror must provide, along with resumes, Letters of Intent (LOI)/Letters of Commitment

(LOC) confirming Key Personnel selection and availability immediately upon task order award.

1. The Government reserves the right to use any available information to evaluate Key

Personnel, including (but not limited to) verification of proposed Key Personnel performance or availability from assignment on other Government contracts. The Government may contact references identified in Key Personnel resumes, query databases for certification validity, and inquire with end user representatives regarding the quality of Key Personnel experience and performance.

3.2.2. Factor 2B: Past Performance

There is no separate submission requirement for this factor. The past performance information submitted and evaluated for the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE IDIQ Basic proposal (Factor 2A) will be used for the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO evaluation.

3.2.3. Factor 3B: Small Business Participation

All Offerors will be evaluated on the level of Small Business commitment that they demonstrate in their proposal for the EAOTS ATG/IAS/OPE Global MX TO. Proposals will be evaluated based on their proposed approach to meet the target % in the table below which represents DLA’s Small Business goals for FY26. The below goals are based on a percentage of subcontracted dollars, not total contract value:

Small Business Participation Overall Goal 5%

Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 5% Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB) 5%

Service-Connected Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) 5% HubZone 5%

Table 4 – DLA Small Business Participation Goals

Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

Table 5 – Small Business Rating Method

3.2.4. Factor 4B: Price

A Price Proposal will be submitted in accordance with instructions set forth in this solicitation.

Evaluation of an Offeror’s proposal will be based on the information presented in the proposal and information available to the Contracting Office from sources deemed appropriate. Sources typically considered include Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) office, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), other contracts with the same firms for similar items or services, known commercial sources such as Global Insight Inc. (formally Data Resources, Inc.), Standard and Poor, other sources.

Proposals which are unrealistic in terms of technical or schedule commitments, or unrealistically high or low in terms of cost, may be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical competence, or indicative of a failure to comprehend the complexity of risks of the proposed work and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal. The quality of organization and attention to detail reflected in the business proposal will be considered to be an indication of the quality of organization and level of capability during contract performance.

3.2.4.1. Price Reasonableness

Proposals will be evaluated for price reasonableness. If price reasonableness cannot be determined, additional pricing information will be requested by the Government in accordance with DFARS 215.403-5. Price evaluation will be based on the total price offered for all CLINs. If necessary, an informal breakdown will be required at the CLIN level to include, but not limited to, material, labor, overhead, general and administrative expenses, miscellaneous subcontracting, travel/per diem, contract data and any miscellaneous cost items.