Attachment_4_C-21_AUP_FAR_52.212-1_Adendum.doc

Attachment 4

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO RESPONDENTS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING TRADEOFF SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.1 Program Structure and Objective

1.2 The purpose of this solicitation is to award a single contract for the C-21 Avionics Upgrade Program (AUP). AUP will primarily include the prototype and the installation of the avionics system on 19 C-21 aircraft.

The government plans to award a single contract as a result of this solicitation. Award will be made on the basis of “best value” and may utilize tradeoff source selection procedures. If used, the tradeoff will be between technical risk, past performance, and price among those Offerors who have been determined technically acceptable. Award will be made to the Offeror that provides the “best value” to the Government over the entire period of performance. The contract will consist of approximately one base year and three one year options, which includes an estimated one-year for prototype with limited integration, Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) approval and Type 1 training and three years for installation for kits and spares. The Government intends to award without discussions but reserves the right to conduct discussions if necessary.

1.3 Initial funding will be obligated for the Support Engineering and Manufacturing, STC Design Solution, Prototype Installation, Simulator Data Package, Training Development, Type 1 Training, Travel and Over and Above Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for the initial prototype period.

1.4 To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. The response shall consist of four (4) separate volumes; Volume I –Technical Proposal, Volume II – Past Performance Information; Volume III –Price Proposal; and Volume IV – Contract Documentation.

1.5 All or parts of the Contractor’s Technical Proposal may be added to the contract. Should there be any discrepancies between the Technical Proposal and the Statement of Objectives (SOO) or the System Requirements Document (SRD), the SOO or SRD will take precedence.

2.1 General Instructions

2.2 This section of the Instructions to Offerors (ITO) provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by the ITO and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the SOO, the SRD and appendices. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in the ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation or exclusion from the competition.

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

2.4 Text of proposals shall be submitted in English. Proposals received in languages other than English shall be rejected.

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

2.6 The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the Request for Proposal (RFP) which will become the model contract/solicitation. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in Volume IV of the proposal documentation that the proposal is valid until the date specified in Section A of the solicitation.

2.7 In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

3.1 General Information

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

3.3 Debriefings - 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 IAW FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing. However, Offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing. The CO will notify unsuccessful Offerors IAW FAR 15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request IAW the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable

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

3.5 Electronic Reference Documents - All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) web site at http://www.fbo.gov. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation. In accordance with the SOO, vendors shall be required to submit an approved DD Form 2345 to the Government Contracting Officer in order to gain viewing access to the applicable Government Technical Orders posted in FedBizOpps for proposal purposes only.

3.6 Oral Presentation-Oral presentations will not be utilized.

3.7 Communications - Exchanges of source selection information between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the CO. E-mail (encrypted when possible or with password protected attachments) may be used to transmit such information to Offerors and shall include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line. Additionally, source selection information may be transmitted via facsimile (encrypted when possible), U.S. Postal (or like service) delivery, and/or oral with telephonic or face-to-face meetings.

3.8 Amendments to Solicitation - In the event this Request for Proposal (RFP) is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment(s) by signing and returning the amendments with their proposal, thus providing confirmation of receipt and understanding upon submission of the Offeror’s proposal.

3.9 Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals - Proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in sealed envelopes or packages in paper media and electronic media (either CD or DVD) addressed to the CO at the address shown in Section A of the RFP/model contract/solicitation, and showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the Offeror.

3.10 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

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

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

3.10.3 The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table 1 below). The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 1. The attachments identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below.

Table 1 Proposal Organization

Paragraph Number

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Contractors Statement of Work (CSOW)

Unlimited

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

Avionics Upgrade (Subfactor 1) FAA Airworthiness Certification (Subfactor 2)

Schedule and Planning (Subfactor 3) Training Plan (Subfactor 4)

Included with the 100 pgs of technical

5.1.1, 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 Present/Past Performance Information Sheets (PPIS) (See Attach 1.1) to include the Relevant Contract Narrative

13 pages

Unlimited

Unlimited

Tab Only

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

N/A

N/A

Unlimited

Unlimited

3.10.4 File Names - Offerors shall submit volumes with the following file names: Volume 1 – Technical.doc, Volume II – Past Perf.doc, Volume III –Price.doc, and Volume IV – Contract.doc.

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

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

3.10.7 Cross Referencing - Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation, which is not found in its designated volume, will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted when its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

3.10.8 Indexing - Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Also, in the technical volume, identify which evaluation factor is being addressed within the tab. Include an indexed list of Tables and Figures.

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

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

VOLUME I - TECHNICAL

Factor 1 - Technical

Entire Document

3.7 5.5.2.2 5.6

Factor 2 - Technical Risk

VOLUME II - PAST PERFORMANCE

(Factor 3)

3.11 Page Size and Format

3.11.1 A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Page line spacing shall be 1.5 lines. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than Arial 12 points. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall apply to responses to Evaluation Notice (ENs). These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

3.11.2 Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and count as a single page. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics; not for pages of text. The following limitation only applies to the Technical Volume. Text intended for evaluation within all figures, charts, tables, and graphs, to include imbedded images, shall be no less than Arial 8-pt. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals. Any text within figures, charts, tables, and graphs which do not meet this requirement will not be considered in the evaluation. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

3.12 Binding and Labeling - Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring, loose-leaf binder permitting the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the offeror’s name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. All unclassified document binders shall have a color other than red or other applicable security designation colors. Be sure to 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.

3.13 Electronic Offers - The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. When discrepancies exist between the written hard copies and those provided in electronic format, the written hard copies will take precedence in all cases. For electronic copies, indicate on each Compact Disc Read Only Memory (CD- ROM) the volume number and title. Use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including subfactors, required plans, exhibits, appendices, and attachments, if any. The offeror shall submit volumes I through IV in electronic format. Each volume shall be submitted on a separate CD. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or 2010, MS Excel 2007 or 2010, MS-Project 2007 or 2010, and MS-Power Point 2007 or 2010, or Microsoft Office XP as applicable.

3.14 Distribution - The "original" proposal shall be clearly identified. Proposals shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer and mailed to:

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OFFICE: AFLCMC/WLVK ATTN: Mr. James Banks 3001 Staff Dr, STE 1AG1 104A Tinker AFB OK 73145-3020

Telephone: 405-739-5445 Email: james.banks.12@us.af.mil

4.0 Volume I – Technical Proposal (Factor 1-Technical)

The Technical volume shall be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation Factors for Award. . Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing / satisfying these subfactors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that your firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

Format and Specific Content In the Technical Volume, address your proposed approach to meeting the minimum performance or capability requirements and of each technical subfactor.

Volume Organization The Technical Volume shall be organized according to the following general outline as provided in Table 1:

4.1 Subfactor 1: Avionics Upgrade

The Offeror shall provide an Avionics Upgrade solution for the C-21 fleet that leverages existing Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Supplemental Type Certificates (STCs) approved for the C-21 aircraft or commercial equivalents that meets the requirements contained within the SOO/SRD. At a minimum, the proposed approach shall provide the following essential components:

(a) Describe the Avionics Upgrade technical solution that demonstrates the Offeror’s knowledge, understanding and ability to meet current and known programmed 2020 FAA/DOD/ICAO standards for airborne functions for worldwide operations (excluding flight over both poles) in civil and military airspace. Specifically, describe the integration of the Avionics Upgrade components, Dual Flight Management System (FMS), Inertial Navigation System (INS), Transponder System [Enhanced Mode S, Mode 5 & ADS-B out], Altitude Heading and Reference System (AHRS), Communications Management Unit (CMU), Flight Data Recorder (FDR), Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), Weather Radar, and Global Positioning System [military and Technical Standard Order (TSO) civilian] with each other and with existing C-21 analog systems. (Ref: SOO dated 11 Apr 16 and SRD dated 07 Apr 16)

(b) Description of the avionics solution that employs a modular design and defines key interfaces using widely-supported, consensus-based (i.e. open) standards that are published and maintained by recognized industry standards organizations. (Ref: SOO dated 11 Apr 16 and SRD dated 07 Apr 16)

(c) Description of the solution for hardware, software, integration with all components added by this effort, integration with existing C-21 systems, testing, production, and installation. (Ref: SOO dated 11 Apr 16 and SRD dated 07 Apr 16)

(d) Provide a copy of any vendor or subcontractor agreements in place to provide the required services or supplies. (Ref: SOO dated 11 Apr 16 and SRD dated 07 Apr 16)

4.2 Subfactor 2: FAA Airworthiness Certification

Offerors shall provide either an a solution with existing STCs or an approach to airworthiness certification, including Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) approval and development of standards and compliance for USAF criteria not verified completely by FAA certification.

At a minimum, the proposed approach shall describe the process for FAA STC Approval and USAF Airworthiness Certification. Identify applicability of all Airworthiness Certification Criteria and include rationale for criteria identified as non-applicable. Provide criteria standards, including specific numbers where appropriate, for all applicable criteria to objectively define the airworthiness requirements. Define the method of compliance for all applicable criteria. Provide a draft FAA Certification Plan. FAA Order 8110-101A should be used as guidance for FAA STC approval. For military and civil references included with the airworthiness criteria, MIL-HDBK-516C is to be used only as guidance in developing the criteria standards and methods of compliance. (Ref: SOO dated 11 Apr 16 and SRD dated 07 Apr 16)

4.3 Subfactor 3: Schedule and Planning

Offerors shall provide a systematic approach to program planning, scheduling and execution.

At a minimum, the proposed approach shall include the following essential components and shall include for each, narrative explanations of the durations, rationale, logic, environment, and IMS definitions:

(a) Prototype completion and test including adequate staffing to meet Initial Operational Capability (IOC) by 2 Qtr FY 2019, production kit deliveries and installation including kit proofing with any necessary kit/aircraft retrofits and provide equipment and facilities for prototype, test, manufacturing, production, and installation to meet Full Operational Capability (FOC) NLT 1 Qtr FY 2020. Offerors shall build and provide an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) using DoD IMP and IMS Preparation and Users Guide, Version 0.9, 21 Oct 05. The IMP must correlate to the IMS, CSOW, CWBS, Model Contract, offeror’s organizational structure and specification tree. The IMS shall reflect key IMP events, accomplishments and criteria; and associated entry and exit criteria. The IMS shall be top level including milestones through Prototype and Production phases. Government directed milestone reviews and activities (IAW DoDI 5000.02, Jan 15) should be included and appropriately linked in the schedule. Focus shall primarily be on key processes, risk drivers and key milestones of the program and shall clearly indicate the critical path. (Ref: SOO dated 11 Apr 16)

(b) For this solution, provide a description of the management and staffing with qualified experts in the appropriate disciplines to accomplish all aspects of the program. (Ref: SOO dated11 Apr 16)

4.4 Subfactor 4: Training Plan

Offerors shall provide a comprehensive training plan to deliver the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) In Accordance With (IAW) Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Parts 21 and 25.

At a minimum, the proposed approach shall describe training for the initial cadre of pilots and maintenance personnel for both flight and maintenance operations using the new Avionics Upgrade configuration. (Ref: SOO Sections 1.2.1, 3.7, 5.5.2.2, and 5.6)

4.5 Technical Risk (Factor 2)

The offeror shall address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of the offeror’s proposed technical approach for Subfactor 1, Avionics Upgrade, Subfactor 2, Airworthiness Certification Approach, and Subfactor 3, Program Planning, Scheduling and Execution. The Offeror shall address Technical Risk for these subfactors that the offeror considers to have potential for disruption to schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The offeror shall classify each risk in accordance with DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 3, Technical Risk Rating (same as the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation Factors for Award, paragraph 2.3). The offeror shall provide the rationale for each risk, including quantitative estimates of the impacts on cost, schedule, and performance. The offeror shall describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of the risk’s potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of contract requirements (for example, SOO requirements), whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. For each risk the offeror identifies, the offeror shall outline how that risk is eliminated or reduce to an acceptable level in the proposed mitigation plan.

5.0 VOLUME II - Past Performance (Factor 3)

5.1 General

The Offeror shall address past performance associated with those aspects of the Offeror’s proposed approach for the Technical 1 subfactors.

5.1.1 Each Offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Attachment 1.1 of the ITO. This information is required on the Offeror and significant subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform the work outlined in the solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each Offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance. Specifically, please provide any past FAA STC Certification experience including FAA STC Certification sought and received.

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

5.2 Early Proposal Information - Each Offeror is requested to submit Volume II - Past Performance for each relevant contract five (5) calendar days prior to the solicitation closing date. Failure to submit early proposal information will not result in Offeror disqualification.

As soon as practicable, offerors shall complete Section 1 of the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 1.2) and e-mail it and the Performance Questionnaire Letter (Attachment 1.3) to all points of contacts (POCs) the Offeror has listed in the Past Performance Information Sheets (Attachment 1.1). The POCs will complete the questionnaires and forward them by e-mail to james.banks.12@us.af.mil. RESPONDENTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRES SHALL NOT SEND THE COMPLETED INFORMATION SHEETS BACK TO THE OFFEROR. Offerors shall not follow-up with respondents to ensure they have completed the questionnaires. The PPET will conduct such follow-ups as necessary.

5.3 Recent and Relevant Contracts

5.3.1 The Offeror shall provide Past Performance Information (PPI) on current and/or previous contracts. The PPI shall be completed in accordance with Addendum for FAR 52.212-1, Attachment 1.1, Past and Present Performance Information Sheets (identified in this document as PPI forms). The Offeror shall submit contracts which include all or some performance within the past three years, as defined in Addendum for FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation Factors for Award, para 2.4.2.1 Recency Assessment. Request each offeror submit up to three (3) PPI forms for the prime Contractor and up to three (3) for each significant subcontractor/teaming partner. Significant subcontractor is defined as a contractor who is proposed to perform over 10% of the total effort, or a contractor who is proposed to perform less than 10% of the total effort, but is determined to be performing a critical function. Also request a PPIS form for any past FAA certifications accomplished. NOTE: The requested number of PPI forms for the prime and subcontractors are preferences, and not requirements. Offerors may submit more than the preferred numbers, if the offeror believes the extra contracts are needed to fully describe their relevancy. Offerors who submit less than the preferred number of PPIS forms are not automatically assigned an “Unknown Confidence” rating. Fewer numbers may be acceptable if the Government determines there is sufficient information to determine a confidence rating. Please only submit information on subcontractors and teaming partners performing significant or critical portions of the AUP effort. There is no limit on the number of PPIS forms allowed per team; however, offerors are requested to limit responses to those efforts necessary for evaluation and relevant to the AUP effort and the subfactors listed above. Request each PPI form not exceed a target of 18 pages, although more or less may be submitted, if necessary and relevant to the AUP effort.

5.3.2 PPI Relevant Contract Narrative

For each PPI form, the offeror shall provide a narrative explaining what aspects of the contract is deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. Specifically, the narrative should focus on similarities to the Factor 1 Technical subfactors, Factor 3 Price, and Scope, Magnitude, and Complexity, as defined in Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, paragraph 2.4.2.2, Relevancy Assessment. Offerors shall tailor the relevancy narrative to the proposed portion of effort for each team member (prime and subcontractors/teaming partners, etc). Categorize the relevant information into the specific technical subfactors and price assessment used to evaluate the proposal. The narrative may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a Limited or No Confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror shall clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the offeror to be considered a higher confidence candidate. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an offeror has overcome past problems is required. The offeror is requested to limit the narrative to a maximum of 5 pages. However, the offeror may exceed the requested page limit, if determined necessary to fully describe relevancy

5.3.3 Organizational Structure Change History

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

6.0 Volume III – Price Proposal

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

6.1 General Instruction

Information beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your price position. All information relating to the proposed price including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price Volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

6.1.1 Pricing will be evaluated using the Attachment 1 Pricing Matrix. Proposed CLIN unit pricing shall be input into the Pricing Matrix. Estimated quantities per CLIN are provided in the Pricing Matrix for evaluation purposes only and DO NOT obligate the Government to exercise or guarantee such quantities or extended pricing during the contract performance period.

6.1.2 Rounding

All proposed dollar amounts shall be rounded to two (2) decimal places to the right of the decimal point, except material handling rates and G&A rates are rounded to four (4) decimals. The Pricing Matrix format provides for decimal places that must be in accordance with this required decimal format.

6.1.3 Pricing Information Requirements

FAR Part 15 applies regarding price analysis. In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b), prices based on adequate price competition do not require submission of cost or pricing data. In accordance with FAR 15.403-3(a), however, data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. FAR 15.403-3(a) provides for obtaining data other than certified cost or pricing data if needed to determine price reasonableness. Therefore, the FAR does not preclude the requirement for obtaining data other than certified cost or pricing data under certain circumstances and the government reserves the right to obtain data as appropriate. If the CO determines proposed prices to appear unreasonable or the possibility that an Offeror does not fully understand the requirement; the Offeror may be required to support price reasonableness via data other than certified cost or pricing data. If, after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, you shall be required to submit cost or pricing data

6.2 Explanation of Specific Estimating Techniques and Methods Explain the methodology used to estimate prices in the development of your proposed pricing. A variety of estimating techniques and methods are acceptable as a basis of estimate in proposed pricing. When responding to the Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the Offeror and associated subcontractors may use any generally accepted estimating techniques consistent with the Offeror’s Disclosure Statement as appropriate and if required based on current contracts per Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) policy and guidance.

6.3 Past Experience Basis of Estimate

Where price estimates are based on past experience, identify the past experience, explain how the past experience relates to the current effort including similarities and differences and how price data available from the past experiences was adapted to the current effort pricing.

6.4 Price Assumptions Used in Development of Proposed Pricing Information to support reasonableness of proposed pricing is required including supporting data and estimating methodology to support price reasonableness. All price assumptions (including indirect rates for the Offeror’s appropriate accounting period, volume or location discounts), scope limitations and/or qualifications of the pricing proposal shall be addressed and explained.

6.5 Price Reasonableness, Balanced Pricing, Price Realism and Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Offeror’s pricing proposal will be evaluated for price reasonableness and balance for all CLINs. Additionally, all CLINs will be reviewed for price realism to ensure adequate understanding of the requirement.

Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate how all proposed prices reflect price reasonableness, price realism and balanced pricing. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the Offeror.

The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the Offeror’s proposed price calculations as computed in accordance with the detailed methodology contained in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2. The TEP will be used for evaluation purposes only.

6.5.1 Price Reasonableness

Reasonableness is based on an overall evaluated proposed price and must represent a price to the Government a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through proposal analysis techniques. To assist in the price reasonableness assessment the Offeror is required to provide supporting explanation/rationale as outlined in this ITO. It shall be noted that completeness is one aspect of price reasonableness- all required pricing shall be provided as complete pricing.

6.5.2 Balanced Pricing

The Offeror is cautioned against submitting an offer that exhibits unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonable prices. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items (CLINs) is significantly over or understated as indicated by application of price analysis techniques such that there is reasonable doubt the offer would result in the lowest overall price to the Government, even though it is the lowest TEP. Also, an offer could be so grossly unbalanced that acceptance of the offer would be tantamount to allowing an advanced payment. Balanced pricing is determined with respect to separately priced CLINs or SubCLINs, or significant unexplained variance in pricing from year to year.

To assist the determination of balanced pricing, Offerors shall complete the attached Pricing Matrix. Completion of the Pricing Matrix allows efficient comparison of proposed pricing with the SOO requirements. If what appears to be unbalanced pricing is due to sound rationale associated with, for example, the proposal’s technical approach, Offerors shall provide an explanation to account for any pricing that appears unbalanced.

6.5.3 Price Realism

Proposed pricing must demonstrate adequate understanding of the requirement and does not pose a risk to performance. Proposed pricing shall be realistic for the work required. Proposed pricing must be consistent with the proposed approach and show sufficient detail to demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the requirement, including program complexity.

6.5.4 Annual Price Changes

Proposed price increases greater than 5% per year shall be verified and addressed for reasonableness in this section. Provide explanation and justification for any annual proposed price increases greater than 5% per year. Annual escalation rates will be reviewed for reasonableness and any indication of unbalanced pricing.

6.6 Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs -- CLINs 0001 - CLINs 0017 are FFP . Offerors are required to provide the proposed unit pricing information in the Pricing Matrix, Attachment 1. In addition, the pricing volume must include the following for these CLINs:

· Describe the basis of estimate/rationale for the proposed unit price for the kit and spares to include a breakdown of the material to be provided.

· Describe material or subcontract dollars, including any applicable quantity information. For subcontracted costs, indicate whether the bid is a firm negotiated price, a budgetary quote, a Not to Exceed (NTE), or a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM), any applicable quantity discounts or best customer discounts, etc… Show when the bid price was established and the date the quote remains valid. Indicate whether such awards are based on competition or sole source negotiations.

· CLIN x007, Aircraft Initial Spares, requires the Offeror to input quantity as well as unit price. Describe the basis of estimate/rationale for the proposed quantity.

6.7 Hourly Labor Rate, General & Administrative (G&A) Rate, and Material Handling Rate for Repair Support (Over & Above CLIN x010) Offerors are required to propose a fully burdened labor rate, G&A rate (associated with Travel), and material handling rate for each performance period for repair tasks in accordance with SOO 5.4.8.1. Minimal repair support is anticipated for repairs required from damage during installation or other non-warranty repairs. The Pricing Matrix includes estimated hours that will be multiplied by the labor rate and included in the evaluation of the Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The Offeror must provide an explanation of the labor rate to include rationale for rate development. The rationale must include details describing the labor categories, all fringe benefits, indirect costs and fee used to develop the wrap rate. The Pricing Matrix includes estimated travel costs that will be multiplied by the G&A rate and included in the evaluation of the TEP. The Pricing Matrix includes estimated material costs that will be multiplied by the material handling rate and included in the evaluation of the TEP. The Offeror must provide an explanation of the G&A and material handling rates to include the rationale/basis of estimate for development.

6.8 Subcontractor and Vendor Pricing

Submit a list of the proposed subcontractors and inter-divisional transfers showing (a) supplier, (b) description of the effort, and (c) type of contract. Include a detailed explanation of your determination of proposed subcontractor or vendor pricing considered fair and reasonable. As prime contractor, documentation is required to demonstrate subcontractor/vendor commercial quotes are considered fair and reasonable. Include a detailed description of your process for evaluating subcontractor/vendor pricing in your determination of fair and reasonable pricing.

Offerors are required to provide an explanation of how indirect costs, General and Administrative (G&A) and profit are applied to subcontractor proposal pricing and whether all subcontractor costs, including indirect rates, G&A and profit are included as a total subcontract amount (i.e., prime treats all subcontractor/ vendor costs as their direct cost to which the prime applies their own indirect costs, G&A, Cost of Money (COM) and profit). Also, include any explanation of your determination to utilize “make” or “buy” subcontractor or vendor parts.

6.9 Contractor Furnished Property/Equipment/Tooling (CFP/CFE/CFT) If property, equipment and/or tooling is necessary to meet the requirement, it is the Contractor’s responsibility to obtain that property, equipment and/or tooling.

Verify your understanding and intention to provide property, material, equipment and tooling. Also separately list all your assumptions regarding facilities, equipment, parts and manpower provided by contractors (prime contractor, subcontractors and/or vendors).

6.10 Proposed Price Reduction per Corporate/Management Decision If proposed prices to perform the required effort have been decreased due to a management business decision, provide a summary of the reduction by major pricing element (e.g., material, labor, overhead, etc.). Also provide complete rationale for the reduction. Provide the estimated dollar and percentage of the reduction, explaining how such reductions are ensured not to increase performance risk to the Government.

6.11 Submission of Price Matrix

Submit the fully completed Pricing Matrix electronically in support of the proposed Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Pricing Matrix proposed pricing submitted must be consistent with your approved estimating system and must duplicate the logic and mathematical formulas reflected in the paper copy of your proposal in Volume III Price proposal. All unit prices for each CLIN or SubCLIN which requires proposed pricing must be provided. The Pricing Matrix shall remain locked without any revisions, adjustments or tampering by Offerors. Price models submitted must comply with the following format requirements:

· Data file should be submitted on a CD/DVD.

· Data file should be .XLS file format (MS-Excel 2010 or earlier) compatible format.

6.12 Government Field Support Agencies

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

6.13 Other Documentation

Other documentation considered by Offerors to be essential for support of proposed prices shall be presented in this Section.

6.14 Volume Organization

The Price volume shall consist of the following sections:

SECTION 1 Include your rationale in response to the following paragraphs in Section1:

6.2 Explanation of Specific Estimating Techniques and Methods

6.3 Past Experience Basis of Estimate

6.4 Price Assumptions Used in Development of Proposed Pricing

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

6.5 Price Reasonableness, Balanced Pricing, Price Realism, and Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

6.5.1 Price Reasonableness

6.5.2 Balanced Pricing

6.5.3 Price Realism

6.5.4 Annual Price Changes

6.6 Firm Fixed Price CLINs

6.7 Hourly Labor Rate, G&A Rate, and Material Handling Rate for Over and Above (CLIN x010) SECTION 3 Include your response to the following paragraphs in Section 3:

6.8 Subcontractor and Vendor Pricing

6.9 Contractor Furnished Property/Equipment/Tooling

6.10 Proposed Price Reduction per Corporate/Management Decision

6.11 Submission of Pricing Matrix

6.12 Government Field Support Agencies

6.13 Other Documentation

7.1 VOLUME IV – CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

7.2 Request for Proposal (RFP) (future Model Contract)/Representations and Certifications The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file. The Offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the RFP, which will become the Model Contract, and Sections A through K, plus Pricing Matrix.

7.2.1 Solicitation/Contract Form (Section A)

Completion of blocks 13, 27 and signature and date for blocks 30a, 30b and 30c of the SF1447. Signature by the offeror on the SF1447 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. The "original" copy should be clearly marked under separate cover and should be provided without any punched holes.

7.2.2 Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices (Section B)

Completed pricing information in Pricing Matrix shall be provided as part of the RFP / model contract. Offerors are not required to enter unit prices in Section B. The Pricing Matrix will be used to input prices in Section B of the resultant contract.

7.2.3 Contract Clauses (Section I)

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

7.2.4 Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors (Section K ) The Offeror shall complete the annual representations and certification electronically via the System for Award Management (SAM) website at https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1. After reviewing the SAM database information, the Offeror verifies by submission of this offer that the representation and certifications currently posted electronically at FAR 52.204-8, Annual Representations and Certifications are correct. The offeror shall insert ‘none’ into 52.204-8(d) [if applicable] to indicate that the fill-in was not missed.

7.3 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and mission requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Should the Offeror make any exceptions in developing / submitting their proposal, they must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, price, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of Table 6. Offerors are cautioned the Government could determine any identified exceptions to be unacceptable, which would make the proposal ineligible for award.

Table 6 Solicitation Exceptions

SOO, SOW, SPEC, Model Contract, ITO, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

why the requirement can/will not be met

7.4 Other Information Required

7.4.1 Ombudsman

An Ombudsman has been appointed to hear concerns from Offerors or potential Offerors during the proposal development phase of this acquisition. The Ombudsman for this acquisition is AFSC/PZC, located at Tinker AFB. This does not diminish the authority of the program director or CO, but communicates Offeror concerns, issues, disagreements and recommendations to the appropriate Government personnel. When requested, the Ombudsman shall maintain strict confidentiality as to the source of the concern.