DTRT57-13-R-20027_Amendment_A0001.pdf

(x)

DTRT57-13-R-20027

x x copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT

THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

x

RVP-31

Cambridge MA 02142-1001 55 Broadway RVP-31 U.S.DOT/RITA/Volpe Center

RVP-31

Cambridge MA 02142-1001 55 Broadway RVP-31 Contracts&Program Support Services USDOT/RITA/Volpe Center

10/04/2013A0001

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)CODE 6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

09/13/2013

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

Continued on page 2 ...

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

Jeremy W. Barrasso

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

Jeremy.Barrasso Typewritten Text

DTRT57-13-R-20027

Amendment A0001

SF 30, Bock 14 – Description of Amendment/Modification (continued)

1. The purpose of this amendment is to provide a copy of the slides presented during the Pre- Proposal Webinar on September 30, 2013, the list of webinar attendees and revise Section L.5.D.

Parts of the Technical Proposal, and Section M.2.B. Factors For Evaluation.

2. The followings documents are included as attachments to this amendment:

Attachment 1: Pre-Proposal Webinar Presentation Attachment 2: Pre-Proposal Webinar List of Attendees

*Please note that slide 44 has been updated to reflect the amended language for Past Performance that is stated in this amendment.

**The last bullet point on slide 44 referenced the incorrect Exhibit Number. The slide has been corrected to read Exhibit C.

3. Section L.5.D. Parts of the Technical Proposal, Part B - Past Performance (Volume II), the last sentence of the last paragraph on Page 97 is hereby revised to read as follows:

If the Offeror does not include past performance history or does not affirmatively state that no past performance history is available, the Offeror’s proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

4. Section L.5.D. Parts of the Technical Proposal, Part B - Past Performance (Volume II), Page 98, the following paragraphs are hereby revised to read as follows:

If the Offeror has no relevant past performance history, it must affirmatively so state. Offerors that state they have no relevant past performance history or information on past performance is not available after the Offeror has made all reasonable efforts to obtain such information will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably under this criteria, in accordance with FAR 15.305.

If the Offeror does not include past performance history or does not affirmatively state that no past performance history is available, the Offeror’s proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

DTRT57-13-R-20027

Amendment A0001

5. Section M.2.B. Factors for Evaluation, Past Performance, Page 104, the following paragraph is hereby revised to read as follows:

If the Offeror does not include past performance history or does not affirmatively state that no past performance history is available, the Offeror’s proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

6. Please acknowledge receipt of this amendment with the submission of your proposal.

7. All other terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged.

DTRT57-13-R-20027, Amendment A0001 Attachment 1 – Pre-Proposal Webinar Presentation

Welcome to Communications, Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) and Air Traffic Management Systems (ATMS) Support

Pre-Proposal Webinar

The webinar will begin shortly.

This webinar will be view and listen only.

To listen, please call using the telephone number and passcode that was emailed to you when you registered.

Pre-Proposal Webinar Communications, Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) and Air Traffic

Management Systems (ATMS) Support RFP No. DTRT57-13-R-20027

The National Transportation Systems Center

Advancing transportation innovation for the public good

U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

September 30, 2013

Today’s Agenda

Ground Rules Procurement Summary Volpe Center Overview Technical Overview Proposal Requirements – Cost and Technical Evaluation Factors for Award Important Dates and Reminders

Today’s Presenters

James Hill, Chief, Air Traffic Management Systems Division

Laura Mellen, Air Traffic Management Systems Division

Jeremy Barrasso, Contracting Officer

This webinar will be recorded.

No verbal or written questions will be answered relative to the solicitation during the pre-proposal webinar.

Any statements or remarks made during the webinar shall not alter the terms of the solicitation.

The terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged unless an amendment is issued.

Any questions, clarification requests, or other inquiries pertaining to the solicitation must be submitted in writing no later than October 16, 2013 3:30 EDT.

An amendment to the solicitation will be issued to provide responses to written questions.

Written questions received after October 16, 2013 will be answered by amendment only if determined by the CO to be in the best interest of the Government.

Procurement Summary

DTRT57-13-R-20027 is a competitive solicitation for Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) and Air Traffic Management Systems (ATMS) support services.

Small Business Set-Aside Eligible small businesses must qualify under the small business size standard of $14M under NAIC Code 541330.

Three to five Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) master contracts awards anticipated.

Multiple award master contracts will provide for the issuance of Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) completion-type and CPFF term-type task orders.

Volpe Center Overview

James Hill Chief, Air Traffic Management Systems

Division

Background Volpe established in 1970 Part of U.S. Department of

Transportation (DOT) Research and Innovative Technology Administration

(RITA)

Named after former DOT Secretary and MA Governor John A. Volpe

Volpe supports DOT goals Safety State of good repair Economic competitiveness Livable communities Environmental sustainability

About Volpe

Who we are

Our Purpose: Advancing transportation innovation for the public good

Our Mission: Improve the nation’s transportation system by serving as a center of excellence for informed decision making, anticipating emerging transportation issues, and advancing technical, operational, and institutional innovations

Our Values:

Public service Innovative solutions Professional excellence Collaboration and partnering

What makes us unique

Entrepreneurial, objective, efficient

Fee-for-service; no direct appropriations Flexibility and responsiveness of a consultant A trusted, objective advisor focused on safety and the public good

Federal advantage

Guided by a deep understanding of federal responsibilities, objectives, and practices

Accessibility of a federal in-house resource that can partner on strategy, tactics, policy, and acquisitions

Driven by public interest—not profit

Volpe Center Organization

Technical Centers

Safety Management

Systems Stephen Popkin

Transportation Policy and Planning

Rachel Winkeller

Environmental and Energy

Systems Gregg Fleming

Transportation Logistics and Security

Michael Dinning

Air Traffic Systems and Operations Steven Lang

Infrastructure Systems and Engineering Robert Dorer

Human Factors Research and

System Applications

Michael Dinning, Act.

Advanced Transportation Technologies

Gary Ritter

Chief Financial Officer William Henrikson

Chief Counsel Monica Conyngham

EEO Officer vacant

Director and Associate Administrator

Robert C. Johns

Human Resources

Susan Connors

Acquisitions Mary Doherty

Information Technology

Eric Frykenberg

Facilities Management David Duncan

Communication and Knowledge Management

Marc Mandler

Director Emeritus Richard John

Organizational Culture and Development

Helen Blackman

Strategic Initiatives for Research and Innovation

Ellen Bell

Deputy Associate Administrator for Research and Innovation

Anne Aylward

Deputy Associate Administrator for Operations David Ishihara

Technical Overview

Laura Mellen, Contracting Officer’s Representative

Background

A large component of Volpe Center work is providing transportation related support to other federal organizations. Volpe uses a combination of Federal and contractor personnel to provide the breadth and depth of knowledge and skills required to carry through our sponsoring agencies’ projects. The contractor will be an important part of Volpe Center’s resources and will work closely with Volpe Center staff.

Objective

Acquire the services of contractors to provide technical support to research, define, execute, and enhance projects in such technical work areas as communications, navigation, and surveillance systems and air traffic management systems.

TASK AREAS OF WORK

Traffic Management

National Airspace System Engineering and Implementation

Next Generation Air Transportation System Concepts and

Systems

Air Traffic Safety

Airport and Terminal Operations

Traffic Management

Support for Volpe’s work requires a strong background in traffic management with a focus on FAA capabilities and needs. The capability to support traffic management systems in all stages of the FAA program lifecycle is required.

Traffic Management work examples

• Support initial research, feasibility studies, cost benefit analysis, simulations, design, proof-of-concept, prototyping, human factors analysis, development, training, verification, implementation, operation and/or maintenance of traffic management systems

• Analyze the impact of traffic management systems on fuel efficiency

• Analyze the environmental impact of traffic, traffic-related infrastructure, and traffic management systems

• Support the analysis of archived data and the development of simulations to demonstrate the effects of various traffic management methods

• Build, test, and support traffic management adaptation datasets

National Airspace System Engineering and Implementation

Support for Volpe’s work requires a strong knowledgebase and skill set related to Air Traffic Control (ATC) systems and system installation.

National Airspace System Engineering and Implementation work examples

• Support the installation of ATC systems at Department of

Defense (DOD) and civilian air traffic control facilities including installation preparation and installation

• Prepare documentation including equipment specifications, cutover plans, site survey reports, and ATC facility requirements

• Provide site visit planning including team staffing, security clearances, site contacts, and notifications

• Support in-briefs and out-briefs, including benefits and features of planned NAS and ATC improvements, system requirements and logistics needs, and implementation schedule

• Gather site-specific configuration data for NAS/ATC systems

• Retrofit NAS/ATC systems with hardware and software upgrades

Next Generation Air Transportation System Concepts and Systems Engineering

Support for Volpe’s work requires in-depth understanding of cross-domain NAS (surface, terminal, en route) automation systems and procedures and of the FAA NextGen Implementation Plan.

The ability to support research and development activities for NextGen and NextGen-related initiatives is required.

Next Generation Air Transportation System Concepts and Systems Engineering work examples

• Example programs include System Wide Information Management (SWIM), Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM), Flight Object, Flight Services, SWIM Flight Data Publication Services (FDPS), Terminal Flight Data Manager (TFDM), NAS Common Reference (NCR), Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS), Corridor Integrated Weather System (CIWS), SWIM Terminal Data Distribution System (STDDS), Airport Surface Detection Equipment – Model X (ASDE-X), and Aircraft Access to SWIM (AAtS).

• The Volpe Center also supports other Government agencies, such as DOD, on NextGen-related activities, including unmanned aircraft systems (UAS).

Next Generation Air Transportation System Concepts and Systems Engineering work examples

• Perform engineering analyses to evaluate the viability of proposed NextGen functions and capabilities

• Support the assessment of the integration of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and associated capabilities into routine NAS operations, for example, sense-and-avoid (SAA) functionality

• Develop, engineer, and maintain modeling, proof-of-concept and prototype capabilities, software/hardware in support of legacy or advanced NAS operational concepts

• Support performance tests and analyses for NextGen automation systems

Next Generation Air Transportation System Concepts and Systems Engineering work examples

• Develop documentation including design specifications, user guides, and training materials for NextGen automation systems

• Support the installation and maintenance of automation systems hardware and software and provide operational support for data feeds

• Develop Concepts of Operation (CONOPs), shortfall analyses, cost benefits analyses, risk assessments, implementation strategies, and engineering alternatives and solutions

• Identify, catalog, and track relationships and dependencies among NextGen programs, milestones, objectives, and aviation related needs

Air Traffic Safety

Support for Volpe’s work with air traffic safety requires an in-depth knowledge of FAA and aviation safety analysis standards and FAA Safety Risk Management as well as the ability to develop simulation models.

Air Traffic Safety work examples:

• Software design, programming, verification, and documentation for NAS simulation model development

• System safety engineering support for Safety Risk

Management

• Conduct hazard analysis for NAS operations and systems following FAA Safety Risk Management (SMS) guidance

• Conduct additional safety analysis for NextGen improvements to including analysis of air-ground CNS & ATMS systems and following FAA and aviation industry standards

Airport and Terminal Operations

Support for Volpe’s Airport and Terminal Operations work requires a strong background with the FAA’s TRACON and airport environment and surveillance infrastructure

Airport and Terminal Operations work examples

• Deploy and/or evaluate terminal and surveillance systems at test sites, including systems testing, human factors assessment, site interviews,

• Example systems include Low Cost Ground Surveillance (LCGS) System, Runway Status Lights System (RWSL), and Airport Surface Detection Equipment – Model X (ASDE-X)

• Support the development of a certification process for terminal and airport products

• Develop cost-benefit analyses, safety analyses, CONOPS and other documentation required to support the FAA program lifecycle

• Provide support to troubleshoot equipment, optimize performance, assist users, and maintain systems

Proposal Requirements:

Cost and Business Proposal

Requirements The Government intends to award the master contracts based on initial offers without discussion as provided in FAR 52.215-1(f)(4). However, Government may reserves the right to hold discussions if it is determined necessary.

All information related to cost or pricing must be included in the Volume I of the proposal. Under no circumstances shall cost or pricing data be included in the Technical Proposal (Volume II).

The Offeror is advised that inclusion of cost and pricing data in the Technical Proposal may result in the elimination of its offer.

Requirements Offerors are required to demonstrate consistency between the labor costs shown in the Cost and Business Proposal and the salaries of the persons whose resumes are submitted in the Technical Proposal. See L.2.D.

Offerors are advised that failure to follow the instructions, provide the required schedules, and include supporting documentation may be eliminated from consideration or may be assigned a higher risk level.

Requirements A prime Offeror is not eligible to receive a Cost-Plus-Fixed Fee (Term or

Completion) task order unless its accounting system has been reviewed by a Federal Government audit agency (such as DCAA or DCMA) and determined by the CO to be adequate for determining costs under a cost reimbursement contract.

Consent will not be given for a CPFF subcontractor unless that particular subcontractor’s accounting system has been reviewed by a Federal Government audit agency and determined by the CO to be adequate for determining costs under a cost reimbursement contract.

CO relies on information provided by a Government audit agency (such as DCAA or DCMA) to determine adequacy of a contractor’s accounting system.

Requirements The Offeror’s Cost and Business Proposal (Volume I) shall consist of the following three (3) sections:

Section I: Solicitation Documents

Completed and Signed Standard Form (SF) 33 Acknowledgment of solicitation amendments Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors

Section II: Information Other Than Cost and Pricing Data Signed Proposal Cover Sheet (Schedule 1) Completed Cost and Business Proposal Schedules Information other cost and pricing data

Section III: Business Proposal Cost Control Plan Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement

Requirements Section II – Information Other Than Cost and Pricing Data

All costs, rates, factors, assumptions, and calculations must be shown and supporting rationale and documentation included. A narrative must be provided addressing each cost element and methodology.

Requirements Subcontracts (Section II – Information Other Than Cost and Pricing

Data)

Offeror must address all aspects of anticipated subcontract consent Offeror should consider what type of consent each subcontractor is eligible for;

Cost Plus Fixed Fee, Time and Material or Labor Hour.

Responsibility of the Prime to review and evaluate subcontractor proposals.

Prime shall show written evidence of its review and evaluation of subcontractor proposal.

Requirements Subcontracts (Section II – Information Other Than Cost and

Pricing Data)

Time and Material (T&M) Or Labor Hour Follow procedures specified in FAR Subpart 16.6 T&M or Labor Hour complete Schedule 1

Acceptance of Billing Rates

1. Rate build-up (cost element and profit). Build up must be shown and each cost element supported.

2. Commerciality. Convincing statistical information on hours, billings, and customers in the last 12 months must be provided. Signed statement that proposed rates are the “most favored customer rates” or reason why they are not.

Requirements Subcontracts (Section II – Information Other Than Cost and

Pricing Data) Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee

If proposed CPFF subcontractor must complete Schedules 1,2,5,6, and 8.

Show calculations used to compute proposed direct labor rates o Basis and rationale for labor rates proposed o For example, current salary data, bidding rates, survey data

Indirect Rates o Information used to develop the proposed indirect rates

Requirements Cost Business Proposal Schedules (Section II – Information

Other Than Cost and Pricing Data)

Schedule 2 Summary of Proposed Cost and Fixed Fee Contractor shall include 100% of each proposed subcontractor value in

Schedule 2.

Schedule 5 Summary of Proposed Labor Cost and Distribution of Labor Cost Between Cost Plus Fixed Fee and Firm Fixed Price Subcontractors shall ignore the 80/20 apportionment of direct labor.

Requirements

Proposal Instructions require that labor be priced out for evaluation purposes assuming a performance period of only one (1) year.

79,482 hours represents the total, estimated, annual requirement.

Offeror’s Professional Compensation Plan (IAW FAR 52.222.46).

Include information on Uncompensated Overtime (IAW FAR 52.237-10).

Proposal Requirements:

Technical Proposal

The Offeror’s Technical Proposal shall consist of:

Volume II (Parts A & B): Written Technical

Proposal

Part C: Oral Presentation

Part A – Staffing Purpose:

Evaluate the qualifications the Offeror’s personnel proposed for this contract in terms of the technical expertise, experience, education, and qualifications relevant to the task area requirements of this contract.

Staffing Plan and Approach Staffing Matrix Resumes o No more than 14 (inclusive of Program Manager and Task Area Manager).

o Not to exceed 2 pages.

o Representative of and consistent with, Offeror’s proposed labor cost presented in the Cost and Business Proposal.

Resume Checklist No. of Resumes

Program Manager 1 Task Area Managers:

C.3.1 Traffic Management 1 C.3.2 National Airspace System Engineering and Implementation 1

C.3.3 NextGen Air Transportation System Concepts and Systems Engineering 1

C.3.4 Air Traffic Safety 1 C.3.5 Airport and Terminal Operations 1

Senior Staff 3 Middle Staff 3 Staff 1 Junior Staff 1 Senior Technician 0 Technician 0 Total 14

Part B – Past Performance Purpose:

Illustrate Offeror's relevant past performance history under existing and prior contracts.

Relevant Past Performance History (past three years) on tasks of the type and complexity described in the SOW.

If the Offeror does not include past performance history or does not affirmatively state that no past performance history is available, the Offeror’s proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

Offerors must send Client Authorization Letters (Exhibit C) for Non-Federal references listed in the five most relevant sources.

Part C - Oral Presentation

The Oral Presentation consists of two separate sections:

o Technical Understanding o Management Approach

Expected that Oral Presentations will begin 25 calendar days after the closing date for receipt of proposals.

Offerors will receive notification at least 10 calendar days in advance of date.

Offerors may provide slides/visual aids to Government on their assigned date of their oral presentation.

Government will not consider the slides/visual aids as stand-alone documents or evaluate the information on the slides except as visual aids to the presentation.

Part C – Oral Presentation

Technical Understanding Offeror shall use presentation to describe how the Offeror plans to meet the requirements of the solicitation, and to demonstrate that the Offeror has the necessary understanding, expertise, and experience to successfully accomplish the range of five (5) task areas described in the SOW.

Discuss critical technical issues in the SOW.

Part C – Oral Presentation

Management Approach Offeror’s capability to effectively and efficiently manage the work represented by this contract.

1) Managing task order contracts including organizational structure and lines of communication;

2) Approach to forming teams and assigning work to subcontractors and managing subcontractors as task orders arise;

3) Ability to ensure that task requirements are successfully accomplished, activities are kept on schedule, and tasks are completed within budget, including approach to managing changes that impact cost and schedule.

ORAL PRESENTATION SCHEDULE

Evaluation Criteria Topic Time Limit Presenters

N/A Introduction 5 minutes Program Manager and/or any of the Task Area Managers Only

Technical Understanding

Presentation of Technical Understanding

30 minutes Program Manager and/or any of the Task Area Managers Only

Technical Understanding

Structured Questions and Answers on Technical Understanding

30 minutes Program Manager and/or any of the Task Area Managers Only

Break – 10 minutes Management Approach

Presentation of Management Approach

15 minutes Program Manager and/or any of the Task Area Managers Only

Management Approach

Structured Questions and Answers on Management Approach

30 minutes Program Manager and/or any of the Task Area Managers Only

N/A Conclusion 5 minutes Program Manager and/or any of the Key Personnel

Oral Presentation - Participants and Attendees:

The Offeror’s presentation must be made by the proposed Program

Manager and individuals identified as Task Area Manager(s) in the task areas for whom resumes have been provided.

The Offeror may bring no more than six persons to the oral presentation, plus no more than two non-presenting Offeror officials or employees.

In order to protect the integrity of the oral evaluation process, employees of firms that are included as subcontractors under more than one prime proposal for this procurement shall not be allowed to participate.

Evaluation Factors for Award:

Basis for Award

The Government intends to make a total of three to five master contract awards but reserves the right to make fewer or more awards if it is in the best interest of the Government.

Award will be made to those responsive and responsible Offerors whose offers provide the best value to the Government based on the Technical Proposal, the Cost and Business Proposal, and other factors as listed elsewhere in Section M.

Order of Importance

Each technical proposal will be evaluated based on the criteria in Section M.

The technical evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost in the selection of a Contractor for award.

Offerors are cautioned not to minimize the importance of the Cost and Business Proposal. When the Technical Proposals are evaluated as essentially equal, cost may become the determining factor in making award.

Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria

The Offeror’s Technical Proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the following criteria:

The first factor, Technical Understanding, is of the most importance. The second and third factors Management Approach and Staffing are of equal importance and together are of less importance than the first factor, though separately are, of more importance than the fourth factor, Past Performance.

Cost and Business Proposal Evaluation

The Cost and Business Proposal will not be numerically scored.

Proposed costs, fixed fee, and profit will be evaluated to establish that they are fair and reasonable and that they demonstrate cost realism.

Cost and Business Proposal Evaluation

The following factors are additional Cost and Business Proposal considerations, not necessarily in order of importance.

Competitiveness of the proposed fixed fee, and profit;

Compensation of professional employees;

Uncompensated Overtime, if any, will be evaluated in accordance with Section

L and FAR 52.237-10;

Acceptability of the cost control plan;

Potential risk level;

Evaluation of Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statements.

Important Dates and Reminders

Important Dates

Any questions, clarification requests, or other inquiries pertaining to the solicitation must be submitted no later than October 16 at 3:30 pm EDT.

Questions must be submitted in writing via e-mail to Jeremy.Barrasso@dot.gov

Proposals are due no later than 4:00 pm EDT on November 12, 2013

Oral presentations are estimated to take place during the week of December 9th, 2013.

mailto:Jeremy.Barrasso@dot.gov

Reminders

Please read Sections C, L, and M more than once.

The terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged unless an amendment is issued.

It is important that each Offeror be fully responsive in providing its best offeror initially since there may be no opportunity to revise the proposal at a later date.

A copy of today’s presentation and the list of webinar participants will be provided as an amendment to the solicitation.

Thank you for your attendance at today’s pre-proposal webinar.

DTRT57-13-R-20027, Amendment A0001

Attachment 2 - Pre-Proposal Webinar List of Attendees

First Name Last Name Email Frank Germain frank.germain@safetynetsolutions.com Kimberly Zurliene kim.zurliene@doveltech.com Patricia Gietl pgietl@csc.com Thomas Kraft tkraft@subsystem.com Dennis Colbert dwc@arcon.com Joe Williams joewilliamsproposals@gmail.com Patrick Cropper patrick.cropper@icfi.com Sandi Ware slw@jta-atc.com Chris Wargo chris.wargo@yahoo.com Calvin Fletcher cfletcher2@csc.com Geoffrey Barker gbarker@atcorp.com Norm Couture norm.couture@safetynetsolutions.com Ela Kubiak ekubiak@flightview.com Eric Chartier echartier@atcorp.com Stephen Cross scross@atcorp.com Vern Reynolds ver@jta-atc.com Charles McCarthy cmccarthy@csc.com James Smith jsmith@northstargroupllc.com John Williford jwilliford3@csc.com Marc Bronsdon marc.bronsdon@safetynetsolutions.com Sherry Daniel sherry@jhcapitalgroup.com Jay Maria jay.maria@humansolutionsinc.com J Thomas jthomas@digitalibiz.com Mary Ellen Miller mmiller@mosaicatm.com Bahar Sadjadi bahar.sadjadi@humansolutionsinc.com Katie Rudolf krudolf@regulus-group.com MaryAnn Hoadley mhoadley@subsystem.com Paul Abramson pda-associates@comcast.net Stephanie Fraser stephanie.fraser@covellsolutions.com Sumit Talwar sumit.talwar@alterityinc.com Richard Green rgreen@subsystem.com Stella Bryant svb@jta-atc.com Chris Stevenson stevenson@mosaicatm.com