Attachment 3 -EWAAC Sec L__on-ramp 2023.pdf

FA8656-23-R-A002

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

“Notice to Offeror(s)/Supplier(s): Funds are not presently available for this effort. No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are available. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an offeror for any costs.”

The primary purpose of this Eglin-Wide Agile Acquisition Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (EWAAC IDIQ) contract is to provide an agile and rapid acquisition vehicle to acquire PEO Weapons program requirements with emphasis on armament and Digital Trinity through which Eglin-related activities may be procured. This contract shall fill agency needs by placing DO/TOs when short notice or unique requirements and products are identified. This contract vehicle does not have specific funding tied to it but rather will depend on inter-agency and outside agency funding executed through the PEO Weapons portfolio and other program funding as provided. Each request for use of this contract vehicle shall be evaluated for appropriateness. This vehicle shall not be used for any Advisory and Assistance (A&AS) requirements.

All contractors that provide a responsive, qualified, and unique proposal may be eligible for award as long as their proposal is received by the RFP closing date. Duplicate/ identical proposals will be considered non-responsive.

The Government intends to conduct evaluations on an incremental, first-in-first-out basis as proposals are received. Contractors are encouraged to submit proposals early and submittals will be evaluated as reasonably soon as the Source Selection (SS) team can convene. The Government will not make award to any contractor prior to the solicitation closing date and time to allow contractors to update their proposal or to fix any discrepancies discovered after early submission.

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

NOTICE: The following provisions are incorporated herein by reference:

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1) SOLICITATION PROVISIONS:

52.204-7 SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT (OCT 2018)

52.207-1 NOTICE OF STANDARD COMPETITION (MAY 2006)

52.211-14 NOTICE OF PRIORITY RATING FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE, - EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, AND

ENERGY PROGRAM USE (APR 2008) Contracting Officer indicates DX or DO Rated Order: 'DO' 52.215-01 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (Nov 2021) 52.215-01 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION - ALTERNATE I (Nov 2021)

52.215-16 FACILITIES CAPITAL COST OF MONEY (JUN 2003)

52.215-20 REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFIED COST OR PRICING DATA AND DATA OTHER THAN CERTIFIED

COST OR PRICING DATA (Nov 2021) 52.215-20 REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFIED COST OR PRICING DATA AND DATA OTHER THAN CERTIFIED

COST OR PRICING DATA (Nov 2021) ALTERNATE I (OCT 2010) 52.215-22 LIMITATIONS ON PASS-THROUGH CHARGES – IDENTIFICATION OF SUBCONTRACT EFFORT

(Aug 2018)

52.216-27 SINGLE OR MULTIPLE AWARDS (OCT 1995)

52.222-24 PREAWARD ON-SITE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMPLIANCE EVALUATION (FEB 1999)

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION SUPPLEMENT (48 CFR CHAPTER 2)

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS:

252.204-7007 ALTERNATE A. SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT (May 2021) 252.225-7003 REPORT OF INTENDED PEERFORMANCE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA –

SUBMISSION WITH OFFER (OCT 2020)

252.227-7028 TECHNICAL DATA OR COMPUTER SOFTWARE PREVIOUSLY DELIVERED TO THE GOVERNMENT

(JUN 1995)

252.234-7002 EARNED VALUE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (MAY 2011)

252.242-7006 ACCOUNTING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION (FEB 2012)

A. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION SUPPLEMENT (48 CFR CHAPTER 2)

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS:

None.

B. AIR FORCE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SUPPLEMENT SOLICITATION PROVISION

5352.201.9101 OMBUDSMAN (OCT 2019)

(a) An ombudsman has been appointed to hear and facilitate the resolution of concerns from offerors, potential offerors, and others for this acquisition. When requested, the ombudsman will maintain strict confidentiality as to the source of the concern. The existence of the ombudsman does not affect the authority of the program manager, contracting officer, or source selection official. Further, the ombudsman does not participate in the evaluation of proposals, the source selection process, or the adjudication of protests or formal contract disputes. The ombudsman may refer the interested party to another official who can resolve the concern.

(b) Before consulting with an ombudsman, interested parties must first address their concerns, issues, disagreements, and/or recommendations to the contracting officer for resolution. Consulting an ombudsman does not alter or postpone the timelines for any other processes (e.g., agency level bid protests, GAO bid protests, requests for debriefings, employee-employer actions, contests of OMB Circular A-76 competition performance decisions).

(c) If resolution cannot be made by the contracting officer, the interested party may contact the ombudsman, [Col Sean Tucker] 1790 10th Street Wright Patterson AFB, OH 45433, 973-255-5472 Concerns, issues, disagreements, and recommendations that cannot be resolved at the Center/MAJCOM/DRU/SMC ombudsman level, may be brought by the interested party for further consideration to the Air Force ombudsman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary (ADAS) (Contracting), SAF/AQC, 1060 Air Force Pentagon, Washington DC 20330-1060, phone number (571) 256-2395, facsimile number (571) 256-2431.

(d) The ombudsman has no authority to render a decision that binds the agency.

(e) Do not contact the ombudsman to request copies of the solicitation, verify offer due date, or clarify technical requirements.

Such inquiries shall be directed to the contracting officer.

APPLICABLE CLAUSES (MAY 2009)

The appropriate clauses to be included in the contract shall be determined based on offeror's response to the Section K representations.

(a) Patent Rights. If the offeror is a small business firm or nonprofit organization, then FAR 52.227-11, PATENT RIGHTS – OWNERSHIP BY THE CONTRACTOR, and DFARS 252.227-7039, PATENTS - REPORTING OF SUBJECT INVENTIONS will be used in Section I. Otherwise, DFARS 252.227-7038, PATENT RIGHTS - OWNERSHIP BY THE CONTRACTOR (LARGE BUSINESS), will be included in Section I consistent with FAR Part 27.

(b) Cost Accounting Standards. Section I of this solicitation may contain the three Cost Accounting Standards clauses at FAR 52.230-3, 52.230-4, 52.230-5, and/or 52.230-6. The resultant contract shall contain only those clauses required based on the offeror's response to the Section K certification titled Cost Accounting Standards Notices and Certification (National Defense).

(c) State of New Mexico. Section I of this solicitation may contain the clause at FAR 52.229-10, STATE OF NEW MEXICO GROSS RECEIPTS AND COMPENSATING TAX. The resultant contract will contain this clause only if performance is in whole or in part within the State of New Mexico and the contract directs or authorizes the contractor to acquire property as a direct cost under the contract.

(d) If performance under this contract will require access to Air Force computer systems (stand alone or networked), compliance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 33-119 and AFI 33-202V1 is mandatory. It shall be noted that such access requires, at a minimum, a National Agency Check or Entrance National Agency Check in accordance with DoD 5200.2-R, Personal Security Program. Offerors shall make themselves familiar with local procedures for processing such requirements and be prepared to comply on the first day of contract performance. Failure to comply with this requirement may be considered a failure to perform.

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICE TO OFFERORS

L-1.0 SUBMISSIONS OF PROPOSALS

L-1.1 INSTRUCTIONS

a. Offerors shall submit proposals no later than 4:00pm Central Time, 24 Jan 2023. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors shall comply with all instructions within Section L and all solicitation submission requirements, including submission requirements within the terms and conditions and representations and certifications.

Proposals shall be submitted utilizing the EWAAC Proposal Response Guide (PRG), Staffing Proposal/Price Template, and other relevant documents in accordance with Table L-1.3 and addressed to the Contracting Officer (CO) and Contracting Specialist (CS). To ensure timely receipt, Offerors shall submit proposals electronically via the DOD SAFE website at https://safe.apps.mil/ to the following recipients:

Mr. Cameron White, Contracting Officer Cameron.white.8@us.af.mil

-AND-

Ms. Lindsay Holdsworth, Contracting Specialist https://safe.apps.mil/ mailto:Cameron.white.8@us.af.mil lindsay.holdsworth@us.af.mil

Late submittal may result in Offeror disqualification IAW FAR 15.208.

b. Offerors shall apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information. Classified information will not be permitted.

L-1.2 GENERAL INFORMATION

a. The offeror’s proposal shall include all information requested by this Request for Proposal (RFP) and shall be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the SOO and solicitation. Non-compliance with the instructions provided in this RFP may result in the proposal being ineligible for award. Deviations from the instructions will be reviewed by the CO to ensure that no contractor receives a competitive advantage. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and substantiating the validity of all stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but instead shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the stated requirements. The Government will base its evaluation only on the information presented in the offeror's proposal or provided during discussions, if applicable.

b. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired. Any of the above documentation submitted, will not be evaluated.

c. The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section L-1.1a of the solicitation. The offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the solicitation that the proposal is valid for 180 days from proposal submission date.

d. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all proposals.

e. Government Point of Contact: The CO and CS are the sole points of contact for this acquisition with the CS being alternate to the CO. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO and CS via email NLT 12pm cst. on 11 Jan. 2023. Written requests for clarification shall be sent to BOTH the CO & CS at the email addresses located in Section A of the solicitation.

f. Offeror’s Point of Contact: The offeror shall notify the CO or CS in writing of the name, phone number, and email address of the individual who shall receive Government notices.

g. The Government intends to award multiple contracts under this solicitation. However, the Government reserves the right to change the total number of contracts awarded, to include no award.

h. Participation by Foreign Firms: In accordance with the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM), foreign firms or U.S. companies determined to be under Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) will not be permitted to participate.

i. Joint Venture: The Offeror can be a prime contractor consisting of parties jointly owned and managed either by a partnership or a corporation established for the expressed purpose of entering into a contract with the Government. Neither party alone will have direct privity of contract with the Government; only the joint venture itself will have direct privity.

j. Offerors shall establish an organizational EWAAC unique email address as part of the RFP submission. The purpose of the EWAAC unique email address is to receive administrative correspondence and solicitations for the duration of the contract. The EWAAC unique email address shall be annotated in the Proposal Response Guide.

k. The Government will employ a Single Point of Entry (SPE) approach to all EWAAC awardees. Companies who have multiple business units shall select and submit ONE business unit to be the sole recipient of an EWAAC award. The SPE is expected to act as the focal point between Government and all business units of the company. All RFI, FOPR, modifications, etc. will be issued to the SPE CAGE code provided. The SPE will then be responsible for ensuring timely dispersal of documents to the proper business unit(s) and facilitating the return of those documents as necessary.

Companies with multiple business units are encouraged to determine which business unit will act as the SPE prior to RFP submission. Those companies with business units already on EWAAC are encouraged to not submit additional business units for award consideration unless said business unit will be designated as the new SPE.

*** Remainder of Page Left Blank Intentionally *** mailto:lindsay.holdsworth@us.af.mil

L-1.3 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

a. The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table L-1.3 below) and utilize the EWAAC Proposal Response Guide and Staffing Proposal/ Price Template as instructed. 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 L-1.3. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the Instructions to Offerors (ITO) paragraph as noted in the table below:

Table L-1.3 - Proposal Organization

Volume / Section Title Method of Submission Qty.

(electronic) Page Limit

Volume I Executive Proposal Proposal Response Guide 1 Section I Narrative Summary Proposal Response Guide 2 Section II Contract Documentation Written, submit separately No limit Section III Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements Written, submit separately No limit Section IV Administrative Submissions Written, submit separately No limit

Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan Written, submit separately

Reps & Certs Written, submit separately Identification and Assertions Written, submit separately

Volume II Factor I: Management/ Technical Proficiency Proposal Response Guide 1

Subfactor A Digital Trinity Capabilities and Roadmap Proposal Response Guide 1 11 Subfactor B Technical Proposal Response Guide 1 10

Volume III Factor II: Cost/Price Excel Template 1 Introductory Documents IAW L-4.2 Written, submit separately 1 No limit

Staffing Proposal: Post-award conference Excel Template 1 1 Capability Statement IAW L-4.1.1.b Written, submit separately 1 1

Volume IV Small Business Subcontracting Plan, if and when applicable

b. If Evaluation Notices (ENs) are required, page limits shall be placed on any responses. The specific page limits for responses to ENs shall be identified in the letter forwarding ENs to the offeror. Excess pages submitted in response to these shall be removed and disposed of by the CO. Other deviations from the instructions shall be reviewed by the CO to ensure that no contractor receives a competitive advantage. Deviations resulting in a competitive advantage for an offeror shall result in the proposal being determined to be noncompliant with the RFP requirements.

c. To the greatest extent possible, each written volume shall be on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume shall be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

d. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and be contained within the page limits set forth in Table L-1.3.

e. Proposal responses submitted MUST using the EWAAC PRG and associated templates as provided. No additional documentation outside of those listed in Table L-1.3 will be accepted.

L-1.4 WRITTEN PROPOSAL SIZE/FORMAT

a. Written proposal material: Written proposals shall be submitted electronically, in PDF format on the EWAAC Proposal Response Guide provided with the solicitation. All pricing spreadsheets shall be submitted in Excel format on the Staffing Proposal/ Price Template provided with the solicitation. Company name and proprietary information notices shall be included in Volume I narrative summary. Offerors shall not deviate from the format of the templates provided and shall not exceed page limits set forth in Table L-1.3.

b. Electronic proposal materials: Do not submit on flash drive media. All electronically submitted content, including proposal guides and templates shall be READ ONLY. The offeror shall submit Volumes I, II, III and IV via email or the DoD SAFE website (https://safe.apps.mil/) only. Identify the following data on the submission in space provided in Volume I:

RFP # FA8656-21-R-0095, Government Address, disclosure statement, and company name. Do not compress the files.

L-1.5 DEBRIEFINGS

https://safe.apps.mil/

The CO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, where upon, they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with 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 for each proposal. The CO will notify unsuccessful offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing shall make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

L-1.6 DISCREPENCIES

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 discussion.

L-1.7 DISCUSSIONS

The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Therefore, the offerors’ initial proposal shall contain the offerors’ best terms from a price and technical standpoint. If during the evaluation period it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, Offeror Responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), and Request for Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will be considered in making the source selection decision.

L-1.8 ELECTRONIC REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

All referenced documents for this solicitation are available online at http://sam.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation. The Statement of Objectives shall be forwarded to U.S. owned vendors only via secure email.

L-1.9 COMMUNICATIONS

The CO will control all exchanges of source selection information between the Government and Offerors. Exchanges with industry may be written and transmitted via encrypted e-mail or DoD Safe website referenced above.

The Contracting Officer (CO), Cameron White (Cameron.white.8@us.af.mil), and Contract Specialist (CS), Lindsay Holdworth (lindsay.holdsworth@us.af.mil), are the sole points of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO and CS via email NLT 12pm cst. on 11 Jan. 2023.

Email may be used to transmit information to offerors only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes “SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the subject line.

L-2.0 VOLUME I – EXECUTIVE PROPOSA L

L-2.1 SECTION I – NARRATIVE SUMMARY

The offeror’s proposal shall include a narrative summary of the entire proposal that is concise, to include addressing significant risks and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding cost/price. The narrative content shall relate to the evaluation factors/subfactors. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal and will not be evaluated.

L-2.2 SECTION II CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

a. The offeror’s proposal shall include a signed copy of the SF 33 (to include clause fill-ins), Sections A through K.

The offeror shall complete blocks 13 through 16 and sign and date blocks 17 and 18 in Section A of the SF 33. Signature by the Offeror on the Standard Form 33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. In doing so, the Offeror agrees to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP Sections A through K. Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require “fill-in” information are appropriately completed, including the proposed prices associated with the contract line items in the Schedule of the RFP

b. This contract is an IDIQ contract with baseline clauses and conditions. The specific prices, contract type(s), delivery requirements and period of performance will be determined at the delivery order level.

L-2.3 SECTION III EXCEPTIONS TO SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors shall meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Offerors shall clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions. Each exception shall be specifically related to a specific paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Offerors shall provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. Please be aware that if any exceptions are taken to the solicitation and award is made without discussions, your proposal will be deemed unawardable. This information shall be provided in the format and content of Table L-2.3 below:

mailto:Cameron.white.8@us.af.mil mailto:lindsay.holdsworth@us.af.mil

Table L-2.3 Offeror Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation Document Page/ Paragraph Requirement/ Portion Rationale

SOO Model Contract, ITO, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met *If no exception is proposed on the compliance matrix, it is understood that the offeror can meet ALL requirements.

L-2.4 ADMINISTRATIVE SUBMISSIONS

L.2.4.1 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION/INFORMATION

The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file as well as to aid in making responsibility and responsiveness determinations, as applicable. The offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the Model Contract, as well as Sections A through K.

L-2.4.1.1 SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORMAT

Table L-2.4, shown below, reflects the Uniform Contract Format.

Table L- 2.4 Section Description Notes to Offerors

Section A Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices

Completion of blocks 7 and signature and date for blocks 19A and 19B/C of the SF 33. Signature by the offeror on the 19A constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. The "original" copy should be clearly marked on the cover and should be provided without any punched holes.

Section B Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs No notes.

Section C Description/Specs./Work Statement No notes.

Section D Packaging and Marking No notes.

Section E Inspection and Acceptance No notes.

Section F Deliveries or Performance No notes.

Section G Contract Administrative Data No notes.

Section H Special Contract Requirements No notes.

Section I Contract Clauses No notes.

Section J List of Attachments No notes.

Section K Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors

Insert Offeror’s Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors

Section L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

No notes.

Section M Evaluation Factors for Award No notes.

L-2.4.2 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST MITIGATION PLAN

Organizational Conflict of Interest is a concern requiring specific attention. Offerors shall identify any existing or potential conflicts and provide a legible, clear, and coherent Organizational Conflict Of Interest Mitigation Plan.

An offeror’s proposal may be deemed unawardable if the offeror is unable to mitigate an actual or apparent OCI or fails to present a compliant OCI Mitigation Plan.

The Offeror’s Approved OCI Mitigation plan will be incorporated into the resultant contract and supplemented with each Delivery Order, as required.

Offeror’s OCI mitigation plan will not be evaluated as part of the technical evaluation; rather, the CO will determine whether any apparent successful Offeror is awardable with regard to OCI concerns, akin to a responsibility determination. This determination focuses primarily on OCI concerns. OCI concerns relating to Subcontractors will primarily be addressed as part of the consent to subcontracting process, which is a matter of contract administration. Similarly, those business units acting as a Single Point of

Entry (SPE) will be subject to the same analysis. The only time OCI concerns relating to Subcontractors will be included in the responsibility-like determination is if the Prime Offeror’s proposed use of Subcontractors demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the agency’s OCI concerns. This determination is concerned both with ensuring objectivity and with avoiding any unfair competitive advantage that could result from unequal access to nonpublic information. It is a significant objective of this acquisition to promote customer confidence that Government activities are unencumbered by potential OCI in the use of customers’ competition-sensitive or proprietary information. That confidence among industry partners is vital to EWAAC contractors’ access to sensitive and proprietary customer information which, in turn, is vital to the effective fulfillment of EWAAC program requirements.

The contract likewise requires the Contractor to exercise judgment to assist the Government in matters where the Contractor’s objectivity is vital. In some cases, however, safeguards are not sufficient to mitigate an OCI. The Offeror shall ensure its submission contains sufficient information to enable the Government to make the determination in these regards.

The following information will be used at the DO level both in determining whether any Prime Contractor is awardable and as the starting point to assessing the OCI aspect of the consent to subcontracting process. After surveying Subcontractors’ and the Offeror’s own business units, and applying the principles of FAR Subpart 9.5, the Offeror shall assess whether there is an actual or potential organizational conflict of interest associated with the offer it plans to submit, including any potential Subcontractor. The Offeror shall disclose business activities of itself, its affiliates, its teammates, and affiliates of its teammates.

The Offeror shall specifically identify those which may create at least the appearance that (a) any participant on the Offeror’s team might therefore be motivated to use the Government customer’s information improperly, or (b) the judgment of any participant on the Offeror’s team might be impaired in its fulfillment of requirements of the EWAAC Delivery Orders. An affiliate includes any person or organization with which the Contractor is associated through an ownership, control, or direct financial interest. It includes any parent organization (to include the parent organization reflected at www.usaspending.gov) and any organization majority owned or controlled by such parent (to include organizations of a common parent as reflected at www.usaspending.gov). The Offeror shall:

- Identify any teammate for whom there is any doubt whether it qualifies as a “Covered Government Support Contractor” (see DFARS 252.227-7013 and 252.227-7014) for programs supported either directly or indirectly under this acquisition, and identify the business activity (or activities) that might prevent the team member from qualifying;

- Identify whether any teammate or any affiliate of a teammate has, within the past three years, participated as a Prime or Major Subcontractor in furnishing end items or services supporting armament and related systems. (Reference DFARS 252.209-7009);

- “Business activities” shall be described with specificity as to customers served, products and services provided, and dollar volume of sales including contracts/sales by date and amount which are representative of each such activity;

- The Offeror shall provide evidence of facts and circumstances which it believes mitigates concerns related to the appearance and/or presence of business activities which may create at least the appearance of a potential or actual organizational conflict of interest; and;

- To the extent the Offeror identifies any potential or actual organizational conflicts of interest, the Offeror shall explain the actions it intends to take to mitigate concerns about potential or actual conflicts. The Offeror shall submit proposed approaches to mitigating the effects of any potential or actual conflicts of interest arising out of the business activities disclosed.

The Draft OCI Mitigation Plan will be reviewed by the CO upon submittal by the Offeror with their proposal. The Draft Mitigation Plan will not be evaluated as part of the technical proposal but will be evaluated by the CO as part of an overall responsibility determination. The CO will review for any potential issues with respect to OCI. Clarifications may be requested from Offerors, but such OCI plan clarifications will not constitute discussions. The Final Mitigation Plan will be an administrative action/issue.

Specifically, the awardees will submit their Final Mitigation Plan(s) for the Government to review for final approval. Once the Plan(s) is/are approved by the Government, the Mitigation Plan(s) will be incorporated into the contracts.

L-2.4.3 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

Offeror shall ensure all required representations and certifications have been filled-in/completed and are provided in their proposal.

L-2.4.4 IDENTIFICATION AND ASSERTIONS

Offeror shall identify and assert any data rights for the contract level. Specific data rights will be addressed at the delivery order, when applicable.

L-3.0 VOLUME II – FACTOR I: MANAGEMENT / TECHNICAL PROFICIENCY

Subfactors A and B shall be provided in accordance with Table L-1.3 and in writing on the EWAAC Proposal Response Guide and within the specified submittal date of the RFP.

L-3.1 SUBFACTOR A: DIGITAL TRINITY CAPABILITIES

Offerors shall demonstrate proficiency in ALL the below Digital Trinity categories in accordance with Section M paragraph 3.1 or submit a plan outlining the offerors’ roadmap to meeting these capabilities in accordance with Section M paragraph 3.1.

L-3.1.1 SUBFACTOR A-1: DIGITAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

http://www.usaspending.gov/ http://www.usaspending.gov/

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.1.1 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Development of program DE Ecosystem that integrates the authoritative technical data, analytical models and analysis, and associated digital artifacts which define the Authoritative Source of Truth (ASoT) to be utilized throughout the system’s life cycle segregated into Digital System Models (DSMs)

• Establishment of processes, infrastructure and environment that utilize technical data and digital artifacts to support integration, sharing and reuse, and collaborative analysis/decision-making throughout the life cycle

• Creation of framework to develop and incorporate into the DE Ecosystem depictions of the system to include at a minimum, but not limited to, the following: requirements analysis; system architecture; design evaluations; definition and integration of system and subsystems, testing, cost estimations; and manufacturing

• Employment of a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach across the spectrum of Systems Engineering, Integration, and Test (SEIT) activities (e.g., requirements flowdown, specifications development, Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) development, risk management)

• Use of digital models as an integral part of the technical baseline that includes requirements, analysis, design, implementation, verification/validation, manufacturing, and general product life-cycle management

• Integration of Modeling, Simulation, and Analysis (MS&A) (i.e. analytical) models into the DE Ecosystem

• Development of DE strategies that will enable the DE Ecosystem and integration of technological innovations to mature into the system’s Digital Thread (DTh) and Digital Twin (DTw) in a future effort

• Utilization and implementation of Government Reference Architectures (GRAs) in the DE Plan. The GRA is a general-purpose architecture design consisting of data models that capture the physical, logical, and functional description of a common open systems architecture

• Development of Contractor Implementation Model that is derived from and is consistent with the GRA

• Utilization of a standard system modeling language for development of the Contractor Implementation Model.

L-3.1.2 SUBFACTOR A-2: AGILE PROCESSES

(Requirements Management, Software Development, Validation and Verification, Technical Order Development, etc.)

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.1.2 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Agile Methodologies: Use of Scaled Agile Framework environments (SAFE) and Modified Agile for Hardware Development (MAHD) Frameworks practices and procedures

• Agile Validation and Verification Processes: Use of Modeling and Simulation of system/subsystem digital models for risk reduction or to satisfy Validation and Verification requirements

• Agile Software Development: Established agile development processes that allow the defining/refining of requirements and developing solutions through the collaborative effort with the customer/end user

• Agile Test Methods: Use of Behavior-Driven Development (BDD), were Product Managers and Product Owners collaborate with their teams to create tests for features and stories; developers create tests for code/material changes using Test-Driven Development (TDD) to include surrogate test beds or accelerated test methodologies. Agile testing is a continuous process that’s integral to Lean and Built-In Quality. Agile Teams and Agile Release Trains (ARTs) are enabled by high quality and ability to implement a Continuous Delivery Pipeline and achieve Release on Demand by employing continuous, and mostly automated testing. Wherever possible, that means testing—and even test automation—come first. In agile testing, everyone on the team is a tester. With these general tests created by their team members, testers can focus their attention on exercising edge cases and the less intuitive interactions with the system.

• Agile Compliance Processes: Support the Government in the accelerated coordination with Government compliance organizations as needed, including but not limited to: Cyber Security Approval Agencies, Platform System Program Offices (SPOs), Safety Organizations (e.g. Non-Nuclear Munitions Safety Board (NNMSB)), Frequency Coordinators, Test Ranges, Air Force SEEK EAGLE Office (AFSEO), Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), and System Security Authorizations Offices

• Agile Validation and Verification Processes: Support the Government in their coordination efforts with the test ranges to establish accelerated processes for an Environmental Assessment (EA)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in accordance with (IAW) the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process

L-3.1.3 SUBFACTOR A-3: OPEN ARCHITECTURE

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.1.3 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Creation of open systems architecture and designs that adopt consensus-based standards supporting a modular, loosely coupled, and highly cohesive system structure that includes the publishing of key interfaces within the system and relevant design disclosure

• Use of Weapon Open System Architecture (WOSA) to support the rapid and affordable insertion/integration and refreshment of technology through modular open design

• Development of WOSA implementation plans

• Use of commercially available software tools and formats in the DE Ecosystem

L-3.2 SUBFACTOR B: TECHNICAL

Offeror responses to Subfactor B (Technical) shall be specific and demonstrate a complete understanding of SOO paragraph 6.0.

Responses will be evaluated against Section M-3.2 Subfactor B: Technical. Offeror shall provide, as specifically as possible, the actual methodology to be used for technical work described in Subfactor B. The evaluation criteria are reflected in Section M.

The offeror shall provide recent/relevant experience in performing technical work under paragraph M-3.2. Experience shall meet a recency period of within the past five years from the proposal due date. Each experience example shall relate to an entity (e.g.

prime, subcontractor, etc.) that the contractor proposes to perform in relation to the work element outlined in the SOO. This information shall be reflected in the written submission.

Offerors shall demonstrate proficiency in one or all of the below technical capabilities (Armament/Weapons Development, Enterprise Analytics, or Innovation Hub) in accordance with Section M paragraph 3.2. Offerors’ future awards will not be limited to or based on capabilities submitted in accordance with Section M paragraph 3.2 for the initial DO. Offerors who are issued a DO under this contract will not be precluded from competing for all future work, regardless of whether they qualified under one or all of the Technical (ARMAMENT/WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT, ENTERPRISE ANALYTICS, or INNOVATION HUB) areas in this subfactor.

L-3.2.1 SUBFACTOR B-1: ARMAMENT/ WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT

Offerors should demonstrate competence in by providing examples of expertise in support of weapons development and related activities.

L-3.2.1.1 SUBFACTOR B-1-1: TRADE SPACE AND CAPABILITIES STUDIES

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.1.1 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Problem Definition

• Development of an analysis plan

• Data gathering and review

• Model development and population

• Hypothesis testing

• Running Models

• Data Analysis

• Documentation/presentation of results

L-3.2.1.2 SUBFACTOR B-1-2: DESIGN AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.1.2 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Design approaches

• Validation of analytical models

• Quantification of contract technical performance and manufacturing quality

• Measurement of progress in a system engineering design and development

• Minimization of technical risks

• Compatibility, interoperability, and integration of all interfaces between the system and its operating environment, including electrical/electronic and mechanical hardware design and software development

• Prediction of integrated system operational performance (effectiveness and suitability) in the intended environment

• Identification of system problems (or deficiencies) to allow for early and timely resolution

• Essential information to decision-makers, assess attainment of technical performance parameters, and determine whether or not systems are operationally effective, suitable, survivable, and safe for intended use

• Employment of agile test methods (test platforms, facilities, modeling/simulation)

L-3.2.1.3 SUBFACTOR B-1-3: PROTOTYPING AND EXPERIMENTATION

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.1.3 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Hardware and software design approaches

• Digital Modeling/simulation

• Laboratory testing

• Agile prototype development and test methodologies

• Small scale production of prototypes to support demonstration/test

• Quantification of contract technical performance

• Ability to measure progress in prototype design and development

• Ability to characterize technical risks

• Compatibility, interoperability, and integration of all interfaces between the system and its operating environment, including electrical/electronic and mechanical hardware design and software development.

• Prediction of integrated system operational performance (effectiveness and suitability) in the intended environment

• Identification of system problems (or deficiencies) to allow for early and timely resolution

• The ability to: a) provide essential information to decision-makers, b) assess achievement of technical performance, and c) determine whether systems are operationally effective, suitable, survivable, and safe for intended use.

• Employment of agile test methods (test platforms, facilities, modeling/simulation)

L-3.2.1.4 SUBFACTOR B-1-4: PRODUCTION AND DEPLOYMENT

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.1.4 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Ability to fabricate complex systems and ensure proper manufacturing planning

• Ability to assess system designs to ensure they are producible

• Ability to track program status and ensure that quality standards are being met during production

L-3.2.1.5 SUBFACTOR B-1-5: OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.1.5 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Ability to plan for and execute operations and logistics support throughout the lifecycle of the system to include system design, test, production, deployment, operations, sustainment, and disposal/demilitarization

• Integration of logistics-related readiness, combat capability, systems commonality, and supportability design parameters into system and equipment design

• Ability to integrate and install a system into its operational environment and train user communities as required

• Ability to provide integrated logistics support for the installed system as required

L-3.2.2 SUBFACTOR B-2: ENTERPRISE ANALYTICS

L-3.2.2.1 SUBFACTOR B-2-1: BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE (BI) TOOLS

Example which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.2.1 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Leveraging DoD’s investment in High-Performance Computing Centers

L-3.2.2.2 SUBFACTOR B-2-2: DATA MINING AND TRANSFORMATION FOR BI TOOLS

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.2.2 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Capitalization of data fusion, analytics, artificial intelligence, and decision tools

• Enterprise interdependencies

• Supply chain risk assessment

• Industry execution ability

• Investigating procurement for experimental purposes

L-3.2.2.3 SUBFACTOR B-2-3: DEVELOPMENT OF CONCISE REPORTING AND ANALYSIS PRODUCTS

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.2.3 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Contract analyses

• Enterprise risk analyses

• Integrated enterprise capabilities analyses

• Workforce volatility analyses

• Industrial health/capacity analyses

• Enterprise Diminishing Material Sources (DMS) analyses

• Future threat/capabilities trade analyses

• Portfolio Cost-Benefit analyses

• Business Case analyses

• Cost per effectiveness analyses

• Inventory/production capacity vs capability analyses

L-3.2.3 SUBFACTOR B-3: INNOVATION HUB

The innovation hub will serve as a location and/or physical place for collaborative efforts between experts, innovators, and creators throughout the DoD enterprise to convene and conduct “industry-changing” research, development, test and evaluation, production, and sustainment for the greater defense of the United States. The contractor will accomplish all acquisition/procurement, program management, and systems engineering actions to operate the Innovation Hub. The actions include, but are not limited to logistics, cyber, environmental, industrial, energy, security and safety requirements (i.e., some projects may require in-house testing, demonstration, and validation support while others will require management of sub-tier suppliers whereby planning and requirements matching to ensure sub-contractor contract deliverables are the critical activities required). Solutions under this work element should be product and/or process focused, using a mixture of people and technologies to provide foundational armament/weapons capabilities in support of DoD mission-sets. Examples of required activities are:

L-3.2.3.1 SUBFACTOR B-3-1: DEVELOPMENTAL [OPS] ENVIRONMENT

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.3.1 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• A developmental ops environment that is ICD 705 compliant and accredited located in the greater Okaloosa County area locality, within 10 miles of Eglin Air Force Base, FL

• Sufficient capacity for developmental operations, demonstration labs, collaboration space, and technology integration to conduct the full range of day-to-day programmatic and operational capabilities for Armament missions.

L-3.2.3.2 SUBFACTOR B-3-2: INTEGRATED HARDWARE, SOFTWARE, AND NETWORK SERVICES

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.3.2 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Environment includes dedicated network bandwidth, Wi-Fi, power, and security suitable to meet AF and DoD requirements for a DevSecOps environment to support armament and weapons mission needs.

• IT support by personnel with the expertise, certifications, skills, and ability in maintaining and solving environment, network, and service issues.

• IT support tasks (anticipated during standard business hours) include monitoring and maintaining the IT environment;

installing and configuring computer systems; diagnosing hardware and software operating system faults; and solving technical and applications problems, either over the phone or in person.

L-3.2.3.3 SUBFACTOR B-3-3: SOFTWARE LICENSE MANAGEMENT

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.3.3 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Personnel authorized by the USAF to install, maintain, and manage licenses for software and business tools that support the Armament mission to include tasks such as conducting software security assessments, software and business tool product research, recommendations, and procurement

• Monitoring license expirations and renewals; system administration; and addressing integration issues.

• Providing situational awareness into which Product Teams are using what tools, when the subscriptions expire, and providing recommendations to continuously improve our tools.

L-3.2.3.4 SUBFACTOR B-3-4: INTEGRATED AND CONFIGURABLE TECH LABS SUPPORTING DOD MISSION-SETS

Examples which could be used to demonstrate a proficiency IAW Sec M para 3.2.3.4 include (but are not limited to) the following.

Supporting examples shall be included in the proposal:

• Lab/workspace, equipment, and infrastructure that will foster the creation of new technology demonstrations in a central location/marketplace.

• Labs may offer hands-on learning opportunities and demonstrations of technology, support to startups of interest to the Armament Directorate, projects, risk reduction efforts, and corporate innovation programs designed to prototype new solutions for the USAF.

• Labs may foster new partnerships and collaborations of partner institutions to push the bounds of technological advancements and create breakthroughs from which new ventures will emerge to enable a lighthouse effect within the Armament portfolio and its enterprise.

L-4.0 FACTOR II: COST/PRICE

L-4.1 COST AND PRICING INSTRUCTIONS

L-4.1.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

To be eligible for award for the first delivery order, offerors shall provide the following reports:

a. Staffing Proposal/Price Template

• The template must be complete;

• The Government intends to pay $1,000 for the post-award conference.

b. A compliance statement that demonstrates how the offeror intends to comply with DFARS Clause 252.242-7006.

L-4.1.2 COMPLETENESS

The Government will review the pricing submissions for completeness and compliance with Section L of the solicitation. Offerors must submit the requirements in para 4.1.1.a and 4.1.1.b.