DRAFT P-8A OFT Projection System Upgrade Sec L_and_M.docx

N6134023R0007

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

SECTION L

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

PART A: GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. GENERAL

All FAR references throughout are intended to be to the Revolutionary FAR Overall (RFO) version. Offerors are required to submit sufficient information concerning all evaluation factors to enable Government personnel to fully assess the capabilities of the Offeror to perform all requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to enable evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the Offeror’s approach, expertise, and capability as required by the solicitation. Proposals must demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of all requirements and associated risks and is able, willing, and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet all requirements. The Offeror shall not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The burden of proof for all substantiation within the proposal rests with the Offeror. Offerors are advised that the Government may incorporate any part of the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government, into the final contract, without negotiations. Price/Cost information, (e.g., dollar values and/or hourly rates) shall appear only in Volume 3 (Price). Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to present enough information to allow the Government to evaluate its proposal. Unsubstantiated statements that the Offeror understands, can or will comply with the specifications, or paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof are considered inadequate and may result in assessing weaknesses and/or deficiencies that render a rating of unacceptable.

The Offeror shall include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. There is no need to repeat information in more than one volume. The detailed information must be included in the most logical place and summarized and referenced in other areas if an overlap exists. Failure to address a specific factor or element clearly may be considered a deficiency. Do not provide elaborate brochures or other presentation material beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal.

Throughout these instructions, “Offeror” is defined as the prime contractor with its CAGE code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form (SF) 33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. A “Joint Venture” (JV) is a partnership or teaming arrangement when the prime contractor consists of more than one legal entity. “JV Team Members” are the entities that make up a Joint Venture. The term “entity” is used to mean any or all of the following: prime contractor, JV, JV team members, any subcontractor, and corporate parent, division, subsidiary, or affiliate (e.g., any contractor with a different CAGE Code/UEI than the Offeror).

2. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SUBMISSION

Proposals must be formatted using a Times New Roman 12 pt Normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced with 1-inch margins all around, and formatted for standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper. All pages should be numbered with section and page numbers. Graphs and tables shall be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt font and should contain a grid, which allows values to be read directly from the graph. Drawing may be of any size and will count as one page. Graphic resolution, including such data as tables or charts, should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented. When using Government supplied templates, no modifications to font or scaling required. All proposal documents must be compatible with Microsoft Office 2016 and/or the latest Adobe Acrobat Reader Portable Document Format (PDF), where applicable. No active scripts or macros shall be imbedded in any files.

2.1 Electronic Submission of Proposal

This section is intended to provide information to the Offerors on the electronic format and application software to be used for submitting proposals. Do not submit hard copy proposals for this solicitation. Use of the software and procedures described in this section will reduce the amount of time and effort needed to receive and upload proposals and will ensure the proposals received are suitable for reading electronically during evaluation.

All volumes of the proposal shall be submitted electronically through the Solicitation Module of the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) at https://piee.eb.mil. No other submissions, such as mail, hand-carried, or other electronic system (e.g., DOD SAFE) are authorized by the solicitation unless specifically authorized by the Contracting Officer pursuant to the paragraphs regarding PIEE System outages below. For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting Offer demo: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to follow the registration instructions found on the PIEE website. It is advised that all potential prime Offerors and their subcontractors ensure the proper company points of contact are registered in the site based on their CAGE codes and have the proper roles assigned well in advance of the solicitation closing date.

It is also the Offeror’s responsibility to confirm receipt of proposals and all electronic communications. Screen shots of the submission should also be taken to validate a submission was accepted in the PIEE system against this solicitation. The Government is not obligated to search for incorrectly submitted proposals in PIEE.

The submission date for proposal is the date and time specified in Block 9 of the SF 1449 of the RFP.

If there is an unanticipated PIEE System outage within 24 hours of the proposal due date and the outage has interrupted normal Government processes so that proposals cannot be received by the exact time specified in the solicitation, the Contractor shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer. This notification shall occur prior to the proposal submission deadline and shall be made in writing. The notification may be in conjunction with verbal notification, but verbal notification alone shall not be sufficient. The Offeror shall obtain written approval from the Contracting Officer to submit the proposal via an alternate method as shown in the paragraphs below.

2.1.1 Operating System and Applications

The Government uses Microsoft Windows 10 Operating System to access proposals. Offerors shall submit proposal compatible with the following applications: Microsoft Word 2016, Microsoft Excel 2016, and Microsoft PowerPoint 2016. Offerors shall submit letters and other signed documents as a fully searchable Portable Document Format (.pdf) file.

2.1.2 Hyperlinks

The Offeror shall not use hyperlinks in its proposal.

2.1.3 Virus Free Electronic Submission

The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that its proposal, including any revisions, is virus free. The Offeror shall specify, in its proposal cover letter, the software, version, and virus definition used to check the data

2.1.4 Multimedia

In order to reduce file sizes, the Offeror shall not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files within the proposal submission. The Offeror is encouraged to simplify the color palette used in creating figures; and minimize size of graphics files; and avoid scanned images.

2.1.5 File Naming Conventions

Valid extensions for files using their associated applications are listed below:

Table G-1 File Extensions

The Offeror shall follow the basic structure of the file naming convention in Table G-2 (Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention) for electronic file submissions (e.g., proposal volumes, attachments, appendices). Offerors shall keep the file name as short as possible (i.e., under 40 characters). Files with longer names may become corrupt or inaccessible.

The Offeror shall provide one folder for each volume, containing all electronic files requested within the volume . Zip files are not allowed.

Table G-2 Naming Conventions

3. PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

The Offeror shall present its proposal information in a manner that facilitates a one for one comparison between the information presented and Section L proposal instructions.

Price information, (e.g., dollar values and/or hourly rates) shall not be included in any volume other than Volume 3 (Price).

Table G-3 Section L List of Attachments

L-7

Question and Answer Form

Each electronic volume must contain the following information:

Cover and title page;

Title of proposal and proposal number as applicable;

Offeror’s name, address and POC;

Solicitation number;

Proposal volume number;

Table of Contents (The table of contents must provide sufficient detail to easily locate important elements). At a minimum, the technical volume must include the paragraphs identified in the CRM.

Table G-3 lists the attachments provided to the Offeror and/or mentioned within Section L. All Attachments L1- L7 are required to be completed by the Offeror and submitted as part of its proposal.

4. QUESTIONS

Questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted to the Contract Specialist via email with the use of Attachment L-8, Question and Answer Form. Each question or comment should reference the applicable document, page number, and paragraph number. Do not include any proprietary information in your question, because the government will provide the question and answer to all potential offerors. All questions must be submitted for the solicitation no later than 11:00 EST ten business days after the posting of solicitation to Amanda McCarthy. The Government is under no obligation to try to answer questions received after that date, but may answer the question if time permits.

Solicitation Point of Contact Information:

Amanda McCarthy, Contract Specialist Email: amanda.m.mccarthy.civ@us.navy.mil Phone: (407) 380-4013

5. CHANGES TO SOLICITATION

The Government will post all amendments to the solicitation at https://sam.gov/ Search the database for the solicitation number N61340-26-R-1010

PART B: SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

1. VOLUME 1 - TECHNICAL

Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to price aspects of the offer.

The Offeror shall submit a Technical volume consisting of the following:

(1) Attachment L-1 Volume 2 Table T-1 Cross Reference Matrix (CRM)

(2) Narrative

(3) DFARS 252.227-7992 and 252.227-7028 assertions

(4) Specifically Negotiated License (if applicable) Overall, the offeror shall provide information that is logical, understandable, and clearly detail its approach to meeting the OFT Projection System Upgrades program requirements. Proposal information must be structured such that its paragraph numbers/letters correspond to the proposal instructions paragraph numbers/letters, although the Offeror may add lower tier sub paragraphs.

The Offeror shall complete a Technical Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) (Attachment L-1) to help ensure that all solicitation requirements are addressed. The Technical CRM is included to help the Offeror develop its proposal and to ensure traceability of Section L paragraphs to the requirements.

In this volume, provide the information described below:

Offerors should identify proposal capability, approach or feature that reduces risk inherent in the program. Specifically, explain the benefits to the Government in technical terms and the degree of impact it will have on any risks.

The Offeror shall demonstrate the extent to which its proposed capabilities will meet the requirements. The extent and the type of substantiation may vary, but each paragraph in the Technical Volume must be substantiated. The method of demonstration is at the discretion of the Offeror; however, Offerors are advised that Weaknesses or Significant Weaknesses may be assessed based on the level of confidence that the Offeror provides the Government with its substantiating information. The burden of proof rests with the Offeror.

The Offeror shall provide information and data to address elements 1 through 4 that demonstrate valid and practical solutions for the requirements and potential risk areas. The Technical volume shall consist of narratives, drawings, block diagrams, or other items specified herein. Any analysis conducted by subcontractors or vendors to support specific calculations or approaches shall be described and included with the Offeror’s approach(s).

The Technical Narrative shall be comprised of four (4) Elements:

Out-the-Window (OTW) Projectors Visual Display System (VDS) Integration Installation On a Full Motion Training Device Automatic Alignment System and Calibration

1.1 Element 1: Out-the-Window (OTW) Projectors

The offeror shall provide a technical approach narrative to identify hardware/software architectural changes required to replace and install the five (5) OTW projectors that meet the specification. The offeror’s approach shall ensure that no specialized hardware, tools, or supporting equipment are required for the installation and removal of the OTW projector system. The offeror’s approach shall also ensure a common baseline across the USN and RAAF P8 training devices.

1.2 Element 2: VDS Integration

The offeror shall provide a detailed architectural approach for integrating the Visual Display System (VDS) into the P-8A OFT trainer system, including how the VDS interfaces with and communicates with the OFT systems.

1.3 Element 3: Installation On a Full Motion Training Device

The offeror shall provide an explanation of its approach to mounting projector systems on a full motion training without requiring structural modifications to the trainer.

1.4 Element 4: Automatic-Alignment Systems and Calibration

The offeror shall provide a system approach to demonstrate its design for a fully automatic-alignment and calibration system that replaces the existing system and meets the specification. The proposed solution shall comply with the software and data rights requirements IAW Technical Subfactor 4.1.

Technical Subfactor 4.1 – Software and Data Rights The Offeror shall complete the assertions in DFARS 252.227-7992 and 252.227-7028 regarding proposed rights in technical data (TD), computer software (CS), and computer software documentation (CSD) to be delivered under the contract. If the Offeror makes no assertions, then submit the list(s) with “None” in the body of the list(s). The terms “technical data,” “computer software,” and “computer software documentation” are defined in DFARS clause 252.227-7989. If the Offeror proposes specifically negotiated license rights for any of the lists, then the Offeror shall submit the proposed license.

In the Technical Volume Narrative, for each item listed in the lists, the offeror shall discuss the extent to which the rights in the deliverable TD, CS, and CSD offered to the Government provide for:

a. Unimpeded and cost-effective operation, maintenance, and upgrade of VDS systems throughout their life cycle;

b. Allow for open and competitive procurement of VDS systems, VDS system enhancements, and VDS system support; and

c. Permit the transfer of the VDS system’s non-proprietary technical data, computer software documentation, and computer software - to include source code, object code, and related material that would enable the software to be reproduced, recreated, or recompiled - to other contractors for use on other systems or platforms.

2. VOLUME 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to the price aspects of the offer.

The Offeror shall submit a Past Performance volume that consists of the following:

(1) Authorization Letter(s) (if applicable)

(2) Narrative (if applicable)

(3) Attachment L-2, Offeror Summary Table (OST-1)

(4) Attachment L-3, Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

(5) Attachment L-4, Past Performance Contract Summary

(6) Attachment L-5, Relevancy Information of the Past Performance Contract

The Offeror shall identify no more than five past performance contract references including delivery orders or task orders, whose performance occurred within five years of the initial solicitation issuance date shown in block 5 of the SF33. The Offeror may only submit past performance contract references performed by the proposed prime contractor, JV team member, and principal subcontractors. The five past performance contract references are subject to the following limitations:

1. Prime Contractor– No more than three past performance contract references;

2. Joint Venture (JV)/JV Member – No more than three total past performance contract references from the JV or from individual JV members that are part of the JV; and

3. Principal Subcontractors – No more than two past performance contract references for each Principal Subcontractor.

For a single-award indefinite delivery past performance contract reference, Offerors may propose the entire basic contract or agreement as a single past performance contract reference or Offerors may propose specific task or delivery orders as a single past performance contract reference. If an Offeror proposes individual task or delivery orders as separate past performance contract references, each order will count toward the record limit per Offeror. If an Offeror proposes an entire single-award indefinite delivery contract or agreement as a past performance contract reference, the Offeror may provide the past performance information for up to three (3) delivery orders/task orders issued under that single-award indefinite delivery contract or agreement, and those three orders will count as one past performance contract reference in the aggregate. Any past performance information for orders in excess of three under the same contract will not be considered in the evaluation.

Task or delivery orders awarded under Multiple-Award Contracts (MACs) and Basic Ordering Agreements (BOAs) will be considered standalone “contracts” for purposes of past performance evaluation. Thus, Offerors may not propose an entire MAC or BOA as a past performance contract reference.

Past performance contract references must contain at least one day of performance within the prior 5-year timeframe of the date shown in block 5 of the SF33 of this solicitation. If there is at least one day of performance within prior 5-year timeframe, the performance of the entire contract will be considered. However, as stated in Section M, recent performance will be considered more influential when assigning the Performance Confidence Assessment rating when compared to past performance contract references that are older.

2.1 Authorization Letter(s)

In order for the Government to communicate with the Prime Offeror concerning Past Performance of JV Team Members or Principal Subcontractors, the Offeror shall submit a signed “Release of Past Performance Authorization Letter(s)” with written consent from each principal subcontractor (including JV team members), authorizing the release of past performance information including adverse past performance information to the Prime. The signed letter(s) should be included as separate files within Volume 2 (Past Performance). For any principal entity (including JV team members) that does not provide an authorization letter with such written consent, the Offeror shall provide point of contact information for each principal entity. This contact information shall include a name, address, phone number, and email address (including JV team members), with whom the Government may coordinate any issues and obtain responses as needed. Offerors are advised that if it does not submit the “Release of Past Performance Authorization Letters” with written consent, then the Government will address any past performance issues directly with the principal entity (including JV team members), and the Prime Offeror will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any related communications.

2.2 Narrative

The Government will use Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) to document demonstrated past performance. The Government does not want to receive, and will not use for evaluation, an Offeror’s self-described assertions of relevance or demonstrated past performance. Accordingly, the Narrative shall not contain self-described assertions of relevance or demonstrated past performance. Instead, the Offeror shall use the Narrative to address demonstrated systemic improvement from issues identified in CPARs and/or anticipated to be identified in PPQs, and, if applicable, to explain how a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code/ Unique Entity Identification (UEI) exception applies Identify systemic improvement actions taken to resolve any past problems identified in CPARs. If applicable, provide quantifiable evidence of metrics or describe the techniques, elements, and tools used to correct problems on the past performance contract reference and, if applicable, how these techniques, elements, and tools may be used for the contract to be awarded as the result of this solicitation. It is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided and substantiate that improvements from past performance problems are being made. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure the problems it finds in the information provided by the Offeror.

For negative past performance issues that the Government identifies in CPARs, the Offeror will not receive an additional opportunity to respond with its systemic improvement via an Evaluation Notice (EN). If negative past performance issues are identified in a PPQ and are the same issues identified in CPARs, then the Offeror will not receive an additional opportunity to respond to those past performance issues. If a new past performance issue is identified in a PPQ, the Offeror will be provided an opportunity to respond to the past performance issue via an EN.

As explained in Section M, the Government will only consider past performance contract references for an entity with a CAGE code/ UEI other than the CAGE codes/UEIs listed in Attachment L-2 in two narrow circumstances. If the Offeror submits a past performance contract reference for an entity with a CAGE code/UEI other than the CAGE codes/UEIs listed in Attachment L-2, then the Offeror shall either (1) demonstrate that it acquired that other CAGE Code through a corporate acquisition, reorganization, or merger; it now exclusively employes the personnel, facilities, or other resources that other CAGE Code/UEI used to perform the past performance contract reference; and those resources will be used to perform the requirements of this solicitation, or (2) provide the information required by 13 CFR 125.11. The first exception above should only be applicable when the corporate acquisition, reorganization, or merger occurred after performance of the past performance contract reference ended. Otherwise there should be a novation to the past performance contract reference. The Offeror shall provide a written explanation

2.3 Attachment L-2 Offeror Summary Table (OST-1)

The offeror shall complete Attachment L-2 according to the below instructions:

Offeror: Fill in name of Prime Contractor Offeror Name: List all entities by name that will perform the contract & indicate Prime, JV Team Member or Subcontractor. Add rows as necessary.

Physical Location of Entity: List the physical location of each entity.

CAGE Codes/UEI: Provide the CAGE Code/UEI associated with each entity that is proposing to perform the work for this solicitation.

Roles and Responsibilities with Work Description: Provide brief work description and Program Role and Responsibility for each entity identified.

Workshare %: Provide the percentages of effort each entity will perform in terms of the proposed price. The % totals must add up to 100%.

2.4 Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) and Attachment L-3 Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs)

CPARs and PPQs will be the primary customer feedback data used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance. The Past Performance Information Reporting System (PPIRS) will be the primary method used to retrieve the CPARS for this source selection.

For each past performance contract reference, the Offeror shall provide the every available CPAR.

The Offeror shall forward a copy of Attachment L-3 Past Performance Questionnaire to the customer’s Assessing Official. That may be a Procuring Contracting Office (PCO) or a Program Manager (PM)– with a copy to the Contract Specialist for this solicitation – for the following past performance contract references:

a. Ongoing or completed Past Performance contracts that do not have CPARs.

b. Past performance contracts with CPARs completed by the Assessing Official more than six months prior to this RFP’s initial release date where contract performance is still ongoing.

All questionnaires should be forwarded within seven (7) calendar days from the initial RFP release date. The Offeror shall include instructions for its customers to send completed questionnaires within one week of the customer’s receipt of the questionnaire to Amanda McCarthy, Contract Specialist, via email at amanda.m.mccarthy.civ@us.navy.mil.

The Offeror shall ensure that all points of contact are current and include an email address and phone number. The Offeror shall not conduct follow-up actions regarding this questionnaire, other than to confirm receipt by the recipient.

The Offeror shall not send PPQs for past performance contracts that are ongoing and have a completed CPARS report that is within 6 months from the date of issuance of the solicitation as shown in block 5.

2.5 Past Performance Contract Documents

The Offeror shall provide each past performance contract reference (conformed, if available) noted in Attachment L-2, Offeror Summary Table (OST-1), Each past performance contract reference submission must include any attachments that describe the tasking, such as the Statement of Work (SOW), Performance Work Statement (PWS), and/or complete Performance Specification. The Offeror may not submit any other documents to demonstrate what was required/performed. For example, the Offeror may not submit CDRL deliverables or self-descriptions of the work. For contracts where the contract is not directly with a government agency and no CAGE code/UEI code is identified, the past performance contract reference must include the company name and address that corresponds to the proposed prime contractor or one of the JV Partners or Principal Subcontractors’ CAGE codes/UEIs as identified in Attachment L-2 A conformed contract includes the contract document that incorporates all modifications through the proposal submission date and is dated and signed by all parties. For past performance contract references where the Offeror, JV Team Member, or principal subcontractor performed as a subcontractor, the Offeror may provide the higher tier contract (the prime contract) for context.

The Offeror shall submit the entire SOW, PWS, and/or Specification for each past performance contract reference. The Government does not want to receive, and the Government will not consider, any document submitted by the Offeror regarding past performance other than the documents referenced in this paragraph. The Government will not consider a document referenced within a SOW, the PWS, the Specification, and/or the subcontract agreement. For single award indefinite delivery contracts, MACs, and BOAs, the Offeror shall submit the SOW, the PWS, or the Specification from individual task or delivery orders. The Offeror will not be given credit for performance that has not been identified at the order level.

2.6 Attachment L-4 Past Performance Contract Summary

The offeror shall complete the Table PP-2 Past Performance Contract Summary provided in Attachment L-4, for all proposed past performance contract references according to the below instructions.

Offeror Name: Fill in name of Prime Contractor;

Entity Name: Fill in the name of the entity that performed the submitted past performance contract reference and state the role of the entity (i.e.: Company X, Prime Offeror; Company Y, JV Team Member, Company Z, Subcontractor).

Contract Reference: Provide a unique contract reference identifier for all contracts proposed as relevant for Past Performance. Utilize P1...Pn for the prime or Joint Venture Team proposing for this solicitation (regardless if the referenced contract was performed as a Prime or subcontractor), utilize T1...Tn for each JV team member proposed as part of a Joint Venture for this solicitation (only include contract references labeled as T1…Tn where the same Joint Venture Team members previously performed as a Joint Venture Team), utilize S1...Sn for subcontractors proposing for this solicitation (regardless if the work on the referenced contract was performed as a prime or subcontractor).

Contract Number: Provide the Contract Number (e.g., N00019-12-C-0001) for the past performance contract reference, inclusive of the basic contract number and delivery/task order number if applicable.

Contract Type: Include the Contract Type (FFP, etc.) for the past performance contract reference.

Contract Title: Include the Contract Name for the past performance contract reference.

2.7 Attachment L-5 Relevancy Information of the Past Performance The Offeror shall submit Attachment L-5, completed with the requested information for all past performance contract reference. For any field that requests page and/or paragraph citations, provide only those citations; do not provide narrative content.

3. VOLUME 3 - PRICE

This Volume shall contain the following:

· Attachment L-6 Vol 3 Price Section B

· Narrative

· Administrative Completeness content All price information shall be contained only within the Price volume. The Offeror shall prepare and submit the narrative in MS Microsoft Word 2016 format.

3.1 Attachment L-6 Vol 3 Price Section B

Prices: The Offeror shall submit a completed copy of Attachment L-6, which consist of the “Price Section B” spreadsheet. Offerors shall follow the instructions for completion of Attachment L-6. The “Price Section B” tab contains all of the priced CLINs applicable to Section B of this solicitation’s effort. Section B shall be populated with the proposed CLIN unit prices by the offeror, and the spreadsheet will automatically calculate the proposed price per CLIN using each CLIN’s quantity value and proposed CLIN unit price. The offeror shall provide firm-fixed-prices for CLINs 0001-0012. In accordance with FAR clause 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options, the Option CLINs will be evaluated and used to calculate the Total Evaluated Price under this solicitation’s effort. No price or pricing information shall be included in any other proposal volume including the cover and title page.

Additionally, the Offeror shall propose an H-clause that clearly identifies the associated data and data rights that are conveyed to the Government, and that also specifically states the fiscal adjustment(s) and identifies the Offeror’s liability in Volume 3 of its proposal. At the discretion of the PCO, this may be a contractually binding clause.

3.2 Narrative

The Government is not soliciting any Offeror investments. The Offeror shall fully identify and explain any investments, such as a corporate decision to absorb costs (e.g., company investment or management challenge or a contribution of resources and/or equipment). The Offeror shall also explain any other appearance of unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. Any apparent imbalances in the pricing, high or low proposed prices as compared to historical data, or any other anomalies, should be fully explained.

3.3 Administrative Completeness

The Offeror shall provide the following:

Signed Standard Form 1449 for basic solicitation and signed Standard Form 30 for each amendment.

Proposal cover letter stating that the proposal has been checked for viruses; is virus free; and the software, version, and virus definition to check the data.

Assumptions, Conditions, Exceptions, Deviations or Waivers: Assumptions, conditions, exceptions, deviations, and requests for waivers may cause proposals to be considered deficient and, thus, not awardable. If there are no assumptions, conditions, exceptions, deviations or waivers, the offeror shall provide a statement stating that the proposal contains no assumptions, conditions, exceptions, deviations or waivers. If the offeror proposes an assumption, condition, exception, deviation, or waiver to a term or condition of the solicitation, the offeror shall provide a detailed description for each assumption, condition, exception, deviation, or request for waiver, as applicable. The offeror shall identify the portion of the solicitation and the offeror’s proposal that are affected. Offerors shall submit questions/comments regarding any difficulties with this solicitation prior to submitting the proposal.

Complete Section K and all of the required fill-in clauses from other sections of the RFP.

A statement identifying the proposal expiration period. The proposal expiration period shall be no less than 250 days from close of solicitation.

A statement acknowledging the requirement to provide additional cost or pricing information and certify the data prior to award if/when requested by the Government.

The mailing address, telephone, fax numbers, and facility codes for the Offeror’s local Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and Government Paying Office. The offeror shall also provide their Tax Identification Number (TIN), UEI and CAGE code.

The most recent date on which their Accounting, Purchasing, Government Property, and Estimating Systems were determined adequate and identified the verifying Government agency. Negative responses required.

A definition of the legal relationship between the entities if it is other than a Prime/Subcontractor relationship.

A copy of the Joint Venture Agreement, if applicable.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

SECTION M

SECTION M:

M-1 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION

The Government expects to select one Offeror whose proposal offers the “Best Value” to the Government, using the trade-off method. "Best Value" means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government's estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit(s) in response to the requirement. Offerors are advised that proposals meeting the solicitation requirements with the lowest price may not be selected for an award if award to a higher-priced Offeror is determined to be more beneficial to the Government. However, the perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal must merit the additional cost/price.

1. EVALUATION PROCESS

The Government intends to evaluate each proposal and award a contract without negotiations to the responsible Offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, provides the greatest overall benefit to the Government, all factors considered. Therefore, Offerors are cautioned that their initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a technical, past performance, and price standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct negotiations and request proposal revisions if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. When a competitive range is established, the Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. The Government may use information other than that provided by the Offeror in its evaluation, including past performance information and the results of questionnaires, cost models, etc.

Non-compliance with the terms, conditions, or requirements set forth in the solicitation may be considered a deficiency. The Government may consider any exception, deviation or waiver to any term or condition of the RFP that is not expressly authorized by the RFP to be a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. Additionally, any approach that relies on Government resources or operations (e.g., Government Furnished Property, Government Furnished Equipment, Government personnel/actions, Government Concept of Operation changes, etc.) in order to comply with a requirement, unless otherwise allowed, may be considered a deficiency. A proposal assessed with a deficiency will make the offer ineligible for award.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Proposals shall be evaluated using the following factors: Technical, Past Performance, and Price. Technical and Past Performance are equally important. Elements within the Technical factor are not rated subfactors and are not weighted. The Technical and Past Performance factors are individually more important than Price, and, when combined, are significantly more important than Price. Therefore, the source selection authority is permitted to select an Offeror that has proposed a higher Price if the Technical and/or Past Performance superiority of that Offeror’s proposal is worth the price premium.

The proposal must demonstrate to the Government’s satisfaction that the Offeror will successfully accomplish the solicitation requirements. Proposal information provided for one factor may be used to assess other factors if the Government deems it appropriate.

PART B: SPECIFIC INFORMATION

1. VOLUME 1 - TECHNICAL

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Technical Proposal to determine the Offeror's understanding of, approach to, and ability to meet the solicitation requirements. The Government will assess the Offeror’s Technical Proposal with respect to its compliance with the solicitation requirements and the risk associated with the Offeror’s approach.

For the Technical factor a combined Technical/Risk Rating will be assigned. The Technical aspect is an assessment of compliance with the solicitation requirements and merit which considers the benefits and detriments related to program performance and operations. The degree of benefit to the Government associated with a strength(s) will be considered in determining whether the Offeror’s approach and understanding of requirements rises to a level of being thorough or exceptional. The Risk aspect considers the risk associated with the technical approach in meeting the requirement. Assessment of technical risk considers potential for disruption of schedule, increase in costs, degradation of performance, the need to increase Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Failure to address part or parts of the technical factor caused by a lack of information may be assessed as a Weakness(es), Significant Weakness(es), or Deficiency. A combination of Significant Weaknesses that increase the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level may be considered a Deficiency.

Element 1: Out-the-Window (OTW) Projectors The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical approach for hardware/software architectural modifications required to replace and install the (5) OTW projectors system that meets the P-8A specifications. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical approach to ensure that no specialized hardware, tool and/or supporting equipment are required to perform the installation and removal of the OTW projectors system and that the offeror’s proposed technical approach provides P-8A trainer common baseline across the USN and RAAF devices.

Element 2: VDS Integration The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed VDS technical approach to adapt and/or translate interfaces and data between the existing OFT systems.

Element 3: Installation On a Full Motion Training Device The Government will evaluate whether the offeror’s proposed technical approach is adequate for a full-motion training system application with the emphasis on the means of securing and fastening the projectors onto the current OFT projector mounting locations. The Government will evaluate whether the offeror’s proposed design utilizes the current projector mounting locations without requiring additional structural modifications to the OFTs.

Element 4: Automatic-Alignment Systems with Calibration Process The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical approach to incorporate a fully automatic-alignment and calibration system solution that meets the P-8A specifications to support the required system upgrades, and the proposed solution shall comply with the software and data rights requirements IAW Technical Subfactor 4.1.

Technical Subfactor 4.1 - Software and Data Rights The Government will evaluate the offeror’s assertions for compliance with DFARS 252.227-7992 and 252.227-7028 as well as the extent to which the offeror’s proposed rights in the deliverable TD, CS, and CSD provide for:

a. Unimpeded and cost effective operation, maintenance, and upgrade of VDS systems throughout their life cycle;

b. open and competitive procurement of VDS systems, VDS system enhancements, and VDS system support; and

c. disclosure of the VDS system’s technical data, computer software documentation, and computer software - to include source code, object code, and related material that would enable the software to be reproduced, recreated, or recompiled - to other contractors for use on other Government systems or platforms exclusively under Government contracts.

2. VOLUME 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

An Offerors’ proposal will be considered as noncompliant when the Offeror submits a past performance proposal that repeatedly fails to provide specific, pinpointed pages and paragraphs for the past performance Statement of Work, Performance Work Statement, the Specification and/or subcontract agreement, or fails to submit the fully executed conformed past performance contract and its Statement of Work, the Performance Work Statement, the Specification and/or the subcontract agreement. As a result, the Government may not perform an evaluation of that proposal and, instead, the Government may reject that Offeror’s proposal as noncompliant. Should an Offeror’s proposal be rejected as noncompliant, its proposal will not be part of a competitive range determination.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: Recency, Relevancy, and Demonstrated Past Performance (DPP).

a. The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate the Recency of the offeror’s past performance contract reference being evaluated. A past performance contract reference will be considered Recent if the contract/order has any performance within five years of the initial solicitation release date identified in Block 5 of Section A. A past performance contract reference record that is not Recent will not be considered in the evaluation and the past performance contract reference will not be evaluated any further.

b. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate how Relevant the past performance contract reference being evaluated is to the requirements of this solicitation. Only past performance contract references of the Offeror (including JV Team Members and Principal Subcontractors) is relevant. The Government will only consider past performance contract reference of some other CAGE Code/UEI if (1) the offeror demonstrates that it acquired that other CAGE Code/UEI through a corporate acquisition, reorganization, or merger and the personnel, facilities, or other resources of that other CAGE Code/UEI are now exclusively a part of the Offeror CAGE Code/UEI and will be used to perform the requirements of this solicitation, or (2) the Government is required by 13 CFR 125.11 to consider the past performance where the Offeror submits the information required by 13 CFR 125.11. If there is any ambiguity as to whether a proposed entity (i.e. prime offeror, JV Partner, or Principal Subcontractor) performed the past performance contract reference, then the record will not be considered. In determining Relevancy, the government will assess the scope, magnitude, and complexity of the past performance contract reference to the effort proposed to be performed under the basic ID/IQ solicitation as Very Relevant, Relevant, or Not Relevant (refer to Section M, Part C, Table M-2) for definitions of Very Relevant, Relevant and Not Relevant.

To assess scope, magnitude and complexity, the government will rely primarily on the page and paragraph numbers the Offeror cites in past performance contract reference’s Statement of Work, Performance Work Statement, Specification, contract or subcontractor agreement. While the government may review other portions of the offeror’s past performance contract, the offeror should not rely on the government to identify relevant requirements within other components of its proposal. Any past performance contract reference record found Not Relevant will receive no further consideration, with no opportunity to submit a replacement, even if the government requests revised proposals.

c. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate the offeror’s DPP. The government will evaluate for DPP all past performance contract reference found to be Recent and either Very Relevant or Relevant. The government will focus its evaluation on the following areas:

1) Quality of Product or Service. The offeror’s past performance in the delivery of quality supplies and services, which includes meeting technical requirements.

2) Schedule. The offeror’s past performance in meeting schedule requirements, to include on-time or late deliveries, modifications of original schedules.

3) Program Management and Subcontract Management. The offeror’s past performance in managing the contracted effort, to include program management, subcontract management, and cooperation with the customer.

DPP will be evaluated using CPARS, PPQ’s, or any other method deemed appropriate by the government. To the extent there is negative past performance information, the government will consider demonstrated systemic improvement actions taken to resolve past problems. If negative past performance is identified in CPARs and the contractor has had an opportunity to respond to the CPAR, the contractor will not have another opportunity to respond to the negative assessment as part of the evaluation. Negative feedback that the contractor has not had an opportunity to respond to may be addressed via a clarification Evaluation Notice (EN), as per FAR 15.202, and this process is not considered part of negotiations.

d. The Past Performance evaluation culminates in a performance confidence assessment rating see section M, Part C, Table M-3). The Government will assign one of the performance confidence assessment ratings to the offeror’s Past Performance factor based upon the government’s confidence that the Offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements based upon the offeror’s Recent and Relevant past performance contract reference record. In the case of an offeror without a record of past performance or for whom information on past performance is so sparse or not available, the offeror will receive a “Neutral” rating.

In assigning a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating or in the source selection authority’s tradeoff decision:

1. Past performance contract references of any entity performing as a first-tier subcontractor or a member of a Joint Venture will not be considered any less significant than a past performance effort of an entity performing as a prime contractor;

2. Past performance questionnaire information received from non-Government entities (e.g. a contractor) when the offeror or subcontractor performed as a first-tier subcontractor will be weighted similarly as past performance questionnaires received from Government entities;

3. Performance under government contracts will be given more weight than performance under commercial contracts;

4. More Recent and Relevant past performance contract reference will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the Past Performance Confidence Assessment Rating and/or the source selection authority’s tradeoff decision than past performance contract reference of…