Attachment 2 - Section L M - PRG_.docx

Section L – PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted by Electronic Mail. Proposal submissions must clearly identify the RFP number and the date specified for receipt of offers on the subject line, whichever is applicable.

Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals in a manner to be received by the appropriate Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation. Any proposal that is received after the appointed deadline is “late” and may not be considered for award.

The proposal shall remain valid for a minimum of one hundred and twenty (120) days and shall not contain classified data/information.

Proposals shall reference the solicitation number in the subject line. Proposals shall be submitted to the following address with a return email confirming receipt:

The first page of the proposal must contain the information described in FAR 52.212-1(b):

(1) The solicitation number;

(2) The time specified in the solicitation for receipt of offers;

(3) The name, address, and telephone number of the Offeror;

(4) A technical description of the items being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate compliance with the requirements in the solicitation. This may include product literature, or other documents, if necessary;

(5) Terms of any express warranty;

(6) Price and any discount terms;

(7) “Remit to” address, if different than mailing address;

(8) A completed copy of the representations and certifications at FAR 52.212-3 (see FAR 52.212-3(b) for those representations and certifications that the Offeror shall complete electronically);

(9) Acknowledgment of Solicitation Amendments;

(10) Past performance information, when included as an evaluation factor, to include recent and relevant contracts for the same or similar items and other references (including contract numbers, points of contact with telephone numbers and other relevant information); and

Additionally, the Offeror’s CAGE code must be included on the first page of the proposal.

The information listed below shall be provided with the proposal.

Volume Page Limit

The cover letter, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables and glossary of abbreviations & acronyms do not count against page count limitations. Proposal contents that exceed the stated page limitations will be removed from the proposal by the Contracting Officer or designated representative(s) and will not be considered for award.

Text shall be single-spaced, on 8 ½ x 11 inch paper (except as specifically noted), with a minimum 0.5” margins. Pages shall be numbered consecutively. Text shall be 12-point Times New Roman font style. Bolding, underlining, and italics may be used to identify topic demarcations or points of emphasis. Graphic presentations, including tables, may use a reduced font style not less than 8 point and shall have spacing and text that is easily readable.

Each volume in the proposal shall include a copy of the cover letter (letter of transmittal), title page and table of contents. The table of contents shall list sections, subsections and page numbers. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used. Each acronym used shall be spelled out in the text the first time it appears in each proposal volume.

Electronic proposal submittals shall be in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word, MS Excel, and/or Adobe Acrobat DC.

Offers in response to this RFP must be submitted for all the requirements identified in the RFP. Offers submitted for less than all the requirements called for by this RFP will not be considered for award. The Government is not responsible for locating or securing any information which is not identified in the Proposal or the appropriate volume as indicated below.

Content Requirements. In order these are the most important factors, from most important to least important.

FACTOR 1 Technical This is the most important factor. Technical is 50% of the weighted score.

The technical volume shall contain information on the following.

The Technical Proposal shall contain adequate information so that the Government can determine whether the Offeror can meet the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Specifically, the technical proposal shall consist of the following three (3) Bullets:

· Repair Methodology/Compliance:

This criterion shall document the Offerors proposed capability to test and repair the Pitch Rate Gyro assets. The Offeror shall provide information to substantiate the following:

* Demonstrated approach to repairing Pitch Rate Gyro assets in compliance with OEM specifications, FAA regulations(Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 145), and military standards (AR-70-62).

· Test Equipment and Calibration:

This criterion shall document the Offerors proposed capability to provide a test and repair facility and the equipment, tooling and fixtures used for test and repair of Pitch Rate Gyro assets. The Offeror shall provide information to substantiate the following:

*The offeror’s methodology shall include a description of the tools and equipment that will be used to perform testing. Availability and use of certified test stations, Automatic Test Equipment (ATE), and calibration standards.

· Repair Turnaround Time (TAT):

This criterion shall document the Offerors ability to meet or exceed the turn-around-time (TAT) for complete Pitch Rate Gyro asset repair, testing and delivery to meet the requirements of the PWS. The Offeror shall provide information to substantiate the following:

* Standard vs Expedited TAT. Ability to support depot or field return shipping, spares support, and tracking.

FACTOR 2: Past Performance After technical, past performance next most important factor. Past performance is 40% of the weighted score.

The offeror shall demonstrate that that they have a minimum of three (3) years of experience, occurring within the past five (5) years in repairing gyroscopes or similar work, as demonstrated on a maximum of one (1) page. Offerors shall submit no more than three (3) total recent and relevant past performance information. Recent information is described as contractual efforts undertaken from 2020 to present. Relevant information is described as experience in repairing gyroscopes or similar work. Offerors with no past performance shall state as much. The offerors submission of past performance must contain the following:

FACTOR 3: Price Lastly, price is the least important factor. Technical and past performance are the most important factors. Cost is 10% of the weighted score.

Offerors shall provide a completed Section B, as part of the price proposal. The Government will evaluate the summed total of all Contact Line Item Numbers (CLINs) in Section B.

Adequate price schedules and narrative shall be provided supporting the proposed CLIN price elements in Section B. Offeror price proposals will be evaluated based on the applicable criteria in FAR 15.404-1 based on competition and other factors. Accordingly, the analytical techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404-1 may be used singly or in combination with others, as determined necessary by the Contracting Officer, to ensure the prices are fair, reasonable. As this will be a Firm Fixed Price -type contract, no cost-realism analysis is required per FAR 15.404-1(d). A proposal is presumed to represent the Offeror's best effort to respond to the solicitation. Any inconsistency with other sections of the Offeror's proposal (i.e. technical), whether real or apparent, between promised performance and price shall be explained in the proposal. Any significant inconsistency, if unexplained, may raise a fundamental issue of the Offeror's understanding of the nature and scope of the work required and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal as inadequate.

All pricing must be submitted using excel format.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Section M - Basis for Award The contract award shall be made to the Best Value proposal and will be determined via a Trade-Off source selection Evaluation process, with consideration given to the following 3 evaluation factors: Technical, Past Performance, and Price. The Technical factor is significantly more important than the Past Performance factor. The Past Performance factor is more important than the Price factor. When combined the Technical and Past Performance are significantly more important than the Price factor.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than Acceptable must be achieved for the Technical factor, and a no less than Acceptable for the Past Performance factor. The Contracting Officer may select for award that Offeror whose Price is not necessarily the lowest, but whose overall proposal is deemed more advantageous to the Government so as to justify the payment of a higher Price. Conversely, the Contracting Officer may select for award the Offeror whose total evaluated price is the lowest when other proposals are not more advantageous to justify the payment of a higher Price.

Additionally, any other than small business offeror must have an acceptable Small Business Subcontracting Plan to receive an award in accordance with FAR 19.702(a). Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered or the Offeror with the highest Technical rating.

The Government intends to award without discussions (see Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.215-1); however, it reserves the right to enter into discussions if deemed necessary. Proposals that do not contain the information requested in this solicitation risk being determined Unacceptable by the Government. The Government will not assume the Offeror possesses any capability, understanding, or commitment not specified in the proposal.

C. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors shall be used to evaluate each proposal. Award shall be made to the Offeror whose proposal is considered to be the most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED:

FACTOR 1 – Technical The Government shall conduct a combined Technical evaluation in which it will consider risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining ratings. An adjectival rating will be assigned in accordance with Table 1 – Combined Technical Ratings to reflect degree to which the Offerors proposed approach meets or does not meet the iminium performance or capability requirements specified for each Factor. To receive consideration for the award, a rating of no less than Acceptable shall be achieved for Factor 1; Technical. The Government will evaluate the Offerors Volume I: Technical Proposal to determine the extent to which the Offerors proposal complies with all instructions in Sections L of the Proposal Submission Instructions.

Offerors proposals should demonstrate how the proposed approach will meet or exceed the requirements at Section L and the PWS. Offerors are cautioned that parroting of the technical requirements or the PWS with a statement of intent to perform, or plagiarizing from online resources and guidebooks, does not demonstrate a thorough understanding or capability to perform the requirement and may result in an unfavorable rating. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

Technical Factor Ratings And Definitions The rating for the Technical factor will be expressed as an adjectival assessment of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable, based on the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks and uncertainties of the Offerors proposal. To receive consideration for award a rating of no less than Acceptable shall be achieved for the Technical factor.

TABLE 1 COMBINED TECHNICAL RATINGS

DEFINITIONS

DEFICIENCY: 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.

STRENGTH: An aspect of an Offerors proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

WEAKNESS: A flaw in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

FACTOR 2 – Past Performance: The Government will determine if the offeror as an entity (Prime contractor and all proposed major subcontractors) clearly meets minimum requirements of the solicitation for experience.

Acceptable: Offeror meets the minimum requirement of 3 years of experience (occurring within the past 5 years) in repairing gyroscopes or similar work.

Unacceptable: Offeror does not meet the minimum requirement of 3 years of experience (occurring within the past 5 years) in repairing gyroscopes or similar work.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or 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. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

FACTOR 3 - Price Offerors shall provide a completed Section B, as part of the price proposal. The Government will evaluate the summed total of all Contact Line Item Numbers (CLINs) in Section B.

Adequate price schedules and narrative shall be provided supporting the proposed CLIN price elements in Section B. Offeror price proposals will be evaluated based on the applicable criteria in FAR 15.404-1 based on competition and other factors. Accordingly, the analytical techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404-1 may be used singly or in combination with others, as determined necessary by the Contracting Officer, to ensure the prices are fair, reasonable. As this will be a Firm Fixed Price -type contract, no cost-realism analysis is required per FAR 15.404-1(d). A proposal is presumed to represent the Offeror's best effort to respond to the solicitation. Any inconsistency with other sections of the Offeror's proposal (i.e. technical), whether real or apparent, between promised performance and price shall be explained in the proposal. Any significant inconsistency, if unexplained, may raise a fundamental issue of the Offeror's understanding of the nature and scope of the work required and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal as inadequate.