FA2517-15-R-9022Amendment_01.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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.

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Amendment is to make changes to the follow ing:

1) Technical Capability is limited to no more than forty (40) pages

2) Page Limitations include the Table of Contents, Index and Glossary for Volume I Technical.

3) Para 2.5 has been changed to 2.4 in Subfactor 4 PWS reference

4) The proposal acceptance period is 180 calendar days

5) Compact Disk has been changed to electronic copies of proposals All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 18-Mar-2016

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X FA2517-15-R-9022

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Mar-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer 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 Items 8 and 15, and returning 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 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 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.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

18-Mar-2016

CODE

FA2517 - 21 CONS/LGCCA

NICOLE M. MINTUS

(719) 556-6108

135 DOVER STREET, SUITE 1055, BLDG 350

PETERSON AFB CO 80914-1117

FA2517 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA2517-15-R-9022

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

52.212-1 ADDENDUM

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS-COMMERCIAL ITEMS

A. INFORMATION TO OFFERORS and INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL

PREPARATION

1. Point Of Contact (POC). Upon release of the RFP, the sole POC for this acquisition is the Contracting Officer (CO), Carla Perkins. Address any questions or concerns to the CO, Carla Perkins, at (719) 556-4163 or email: carla.perkins.1@us.af.mil and cc’ the Contract Specialist (CS), Nicole Mintus via email at nicole.mintus@us.af.mil.

2. Discrepancies and Ambiguities. 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 not later than seven (7) calendar days after the Request for Proposal (RFP) release. Also, the Offeror shall give written notification to the CO of ambiguities in the solicitation, including the PWS, not later than seven (7) calendar days after RFP release.

3. Revisions and Amendments. The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the specifications or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such revisions or amendments will be communicated by formal amendment (Standard Form 30) to this RFP. If such amendments require material changes in quantities or costs, the proposal closing date may be postponed by enough days to enable Offerors to revise their proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal closing date and time.

4. Electronic Postings Systems. All documents for this solicitation, including amendments and notices to Offerors will be posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website at https://www.fbo.gov. Refer to the heading of Air Force Space Command (AFSPC), Peterson AFB, CO and the specific RFP number. Interested parties should check this site regularly for updates and amendments.

Supporting technical information can also be accessed and downloaded from the FedBizOpps website at https://www.fbo.gov. The information is normally accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

5. Pre-Performance Conference. A pre-performance conference will be scheduled by and held at the office issuing this RFP prior to the commencement of any work under the contract that will be awarded as a result of this solicitation and offer. The contractor or his duly authorized representative is required to attend the pre-performance conference.

mailto:carla.perkins.1@us.af.mil https://www.fbo.gov/ https://www.fbo.gov/

6. Data Transmission. To facilitate review and evaluation for this source selection the Government proposes to transmit data via commercial systems. Distributed material will be identified as source selection sensitive and distribution strictly limited to appropriate personnel.

Should any contractor object to their proprietary information being shared between source selection evaluators and advisors via commercial e-mail as described above, please advise the Contracting Officer, Carla Perkins, at (719) 556-4163.

7. Unclassified documents, including all PWS exhibits, attachments, DD 254 and workload data will be located on https://www.fbo.gov.

8. For Official Use Only (FOUO) documents, will require submission of information by the Offeror directly to the Contracting Officer.

9. Initial Proposals. Offerors shall submit initial proposals with their most favorable terms, from both a technical and price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

10. Competitive Range Determination. If a competitive range determination is necessary, the Government intends to limit the number of contract proposals to only the most highly rated proposals in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2).

11. Debriefings. The CO will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. The CO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.503. All Offerors may request a debriefing IAW FAR 15.505 or 15.506. If Offerors are eliminated during the competitive range determination they may elect to wait until post award to receive their debriefing; however, each Offeror may only receive a total of one debriefing.

12. Final Proposal Revisions (FPR). Once discussions, if required, have been concluded, the CO will request that Offerors provide a FPR.

13. Questions Concerning the Solicitation. All questions concerning the solicitation must be submitted in writing not later than 12:00 pm (MDT) on 9 March 2016. Submit questions to the Contracting Officer, Carla Perkins via email: carla.perkins.1@us.af.mil. Please cc’ the Contract Specialist, Nicole Mintus at nicole.mintus@us.af.mil.

B. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

1. General Instructions and Information. These instructions prescribe the format of proposals and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the proposed data. The Government intends to award using the Technical Price Tradeoff (TPT) approach. Proposals will be subject to a technical/price trade-off evaluation, where technical capability is approximately equal to price. The Government may award a contract to a higher priced Offeror if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines that the higher technical rating of the higher priced Offeror outweighs the price difference. Offers will be evaluated using the factors in FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items for Award. A proposal that is sufficiently documented to support evaluation factors in a complete and orderly manner will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation. The Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions.

Any Offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered non-responsive.

a. This solicitation is being conducted in accordance with FAR 15.3, Source Selection and AFFARS 5315.3 including Mandatory Procedures (MP) 5315.3 and Informational Guidance (IG) 5315.404-3. Offers will be evaluated using the factors and sub-factors under FAR 52.212-1 Instruction to Offerors -- Commercial Items and FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation – Commercial Items.

https://www.fbo.gov/ mailto:carla.perkins.1@us.af.mil mailto:nicole.mintus@us.af.mil

Non-compliance with the RFP may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award.

b. Offerors shall submit one (1) proposal which consists of the requirements of the IDIQ contract Task Order 1 to included Volume I and II outlined in table 1 below. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing and specific 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.

c. The proposal acceptance period is 180 calendar days from the RFP submission deadline.

d. Proposals shall not contain classified information.

e. Alternate proposals will not be accepted.

f. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one (1) copy of all unsuccessful proposals. The Government will destroy extra copies of unsuccessful proposals.

2. Format Instructions. This section provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. Each volume shall be complete in itself as a standalone document. The proposal should include all of the information requested in the subparagraphs. Failure to do so may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that is sufficiently documented in a complete, orderly, and specific detailed manner will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

a. Proposal Volumes and Binding for Task Order 1. Offerors shall submit one (1) proposal consisting of two (2) separate proposal volumes: Technical Capability and Price. The formats and extent of data are described below.

(1) Binding: Each volume of the proposal will be separately bound in a standard loose-leaf, three-ring binder. The number of copies for each volume is specified in the table below.

Elaborate format and binding are neither necessary nor desirable. All binders will lie flat when opened. The cover and spine of each binder will clearly identify the Offeror’s name, volume number, RFP number, RFP title, i.e., DMS-MES, and copy number, e.g., copy 2 of 5. The original for each volume will be clearly identified on the cover and the spine. All binders will allow for easy removal and replacement of pages.

(2) Electronic Copies. The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. The electronic copy of the proposal will be submitted by email. Revisions to final proposal resulting from any discussions and updates, if required will be submitted electronically. In the event of discrepancies between hard copies and electronic copies of a proposal, the hard copies will be used for evaluation.

(3) Proposal Volume Organization, Number of Copies and Page Limitations. The titles and contents of the volumes should be as defined in this document, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in the table below.

Total page count will be based on the printed proposal submission. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal, but will be removed and returned to the Offeror.

Table 1 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME NUMBER OF

COPIES

MAXIMUM NUMBER

OF PAGES

I

Technical Capability Original plus 5 Hard copies 1 Electronic

Copy

Limit to no more than forty (40) pages total. Page limitations shall include the Table of Contents, Index and Glossary.

II

Price Original plus

1 Hard copy

1 Electronic Copy

No page limitations Volume II shall include the Table of

Contents, Index and Glossary Tab A – Pricing

Tab B - Other additional documents

(4) Pages. A page is defined as each face of an 8.5 x11-inch sheet of paper containing information. All information except for document numbers, page number, etc., shall be provided in an image area of 7 x 9 inches. Two (2) pages may be printed back-to-back on one (1) sheet of paper; however, each printed side of the page will count as one page. The background color of each page of the proposal submission shall be white or ivory stock only (except for change pages after initial proposal submission). All material must be contained within the page limit identified. Excess pages will not be evaluated.

(5) Text. Text type should be Times New Roman or Arial, no smaller than 12-point with normal proportional spacing. Illustrations and tables shall be no smaller than Times New Romans or Arial 10 point. Text lines will be, at a minimum, single-spaced.

(6) Charts and Tables. Foldouts used for charts, graphics, tables, exhibits or diagrams may not exceed 11 x 17 inches. All information (except for document numbers, page numbers, etc.) must be contained within an image area of 9 x 15 1/2-inches. For page count purposes, each printed side of a foldout shall be counted as two (2) pages each. Text used in charts, graphics, tables, exhibits or diagrams may be single-spaced and shall be at least six (6) points in height after final reduction.

(7) Table of Contents, Indexing and Glossary. Each volume shall contain a table of contents. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with a definition for each. Use of abbreviations and acronyms should be limited. Table of Contents, Index and Glossaries count against the page limitations for Volume I, Technical.

(8) Change pages after initial proposal submission. If the Offeror submits proposal revisions, during or after discussions, any changed pages shall be a different color than the original proposal pages and shall have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page identifying the changed content. The date of the revision and revision number shall be reflected on each changed page (preferably on, or next to, the vertical change line). Make spreadsheet revisions obvious by highlighting cells that changed.

(9) Evaluation Notices (ENs) and Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs). Proposal format restrictions shall apply to responses to ENs and final proposal revisions, if required.

(10) Information Regarding Submission of Proposal. Deliver proposals to the following address not later than 12:00 p.m., Mountain Standard Time (MST), on 1 April 2016:

21CONS/LGCCA

Attn: Ms. Carla Perkins, Contracting Officer Building 350 135 E. Dover Street Peterson AFB, CO 80914 All proposals delivered in response to this solicitation shall reflect the following information on the address label:

(1) Solicitation Number FA2517-15-R-9022

(2) The legend "To be delivered unopened to the Contracting Officer "

(3) The volume and copy numbers contained in each box

(4) The “original” proposal shall be clearly marked “original”

a. Offerors are cautioned that Peterson AFB CO has visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass prior to entrance. SOME DELAY SHOULD BE ANTICIPATED WHEN HANDCARRYING PROPOSALS. Offerors should allow sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and arrive at the proposal depository PRIOR to the time specified for receipt. Offerors should be aware that the Government has experienced delays in the postal service to Peterson AFB. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) “Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers.”

b. Offerors hand-carrying proposals to Building 350, Peterson AFB must obtain visitor passes. Offerors should allow sufficient time to obtain visitor passes in order to arrive at Building 350 prior to the time established for the receipt of proposals. If using a courier, submit the name of the individual hand-carrying volumes 24 hours in advance to the CO. The courier will be required to provide identification at the time of delivery.

C. RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS

1. Proposal Labeling. Each volume (Technical Capability and Price) of the proposal will be bound separately, with each volume in a standard loose-leaf three-ring binder. Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated on a stand-alone basis.

Cross-referencing between volumes is not permitted. 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. Elaborate format and binding are neither necessary nor desirable. The cover and spine of each binder will clearly identify the Offeror's name, volume number, Request for Proposal (RFP) number "FA2517-15- R-9022", RFP title "DMS-MES", and copy number, e.g., copy 2 of 5.

2. The original for each volume will be clearly identified on the cover and the spine. All binders will allow for easy removal and replacement of pages. Replacement pages in response to evaluation notices (if any), shall be colored stock with lines in the margin designating the change and the change highlighted.

D. PROPOSAL VOLUME INSTRUCTIONS

1. Specific Proposal Instructions for Task Order 1. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the proposal, the Offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. The proposal must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation. The response shall consist of two (2) separate parts; Volume I – Technical Capability, and Volume II– Price.

2. Volume I - Technical Capability. Technical Capability is limited to no more than forty (40) pages total. Page limitations above shall include the Table of Contents, Index and Glossary. All pages after the forty (40) pages will not be evaluated. The purpose of this volume is to enable the Government to make a thorough evaluation of the Offeror’s technical competence and ability to comply with the PWS titled Task Order 1 PWS for Base Operations and Service Summary requirements. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. The Offeror’s proposal shall include the following:

Tab 1: Executive Summary and Authorized Point of Contact: Provide a one (1) page summary and authorized personnel who can obligate and negotiate for your company.

Tab 2: Table of Contents, Indexing and Glossary. Each volume shall contain a table of contents. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with a definition for each. Use of abbreviations and acronyms should be limited. Table of Contents, Index and Glossaries count against the page limitations for their respective volumes. Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal.

Tab 3: Teaming Arrangements: Provide complete information as to the arrangement and relationship and copies of any teaming agreements. FAR 9.104 will be used to determine responsibility for teaming arrangement/agreements. Subcontractor management will be

IAW FAR 52.244-2.

Tab 4: Technical Capability Volume (Limited to 40 Pages). The Technical Capability Volume shall be prepared in an orderly format and in sufficient detail to address the Offerors response to the following factors:

Subfactor 1: Infrastructure Management – The offeror shall describe its approach to and demonstrate an understanding of the requirements, process and procedures for disaster management simulation and media emulation, including sufficient software, hardware, integration with related components, licensing, registration and credentialing, user training, maintenance, and scheduling infrastructure to support multiple independent DOD and non-DOD exercises, operating on standalone networks or DOD nonsecure or secure networks, with scheduling deconfliction, exercise scalability, scenario tailorability, and annual network recertification. (TO1, PWS titled Task Order 1 PWS for Base Operations, Task 1, para. 2.1.).

Subfactor 2: Exercise M&S Support - The offeror shall describe its approach to and demonstrate an understanding of the process and procedures for DMS-MES and M&S support for DOD exercises for Army North (ARNORTH) (including Joint Task Force-Civil Support (JTF-CS) and U.S. Army, Pacific Commands (USARPAC)), NORAD-USNORTHCOM (including VIGILANT GUARD), National Guard Bureau (NGB), other DOD organizations IAW the PWS, and USNORTHCOM’s non-DOD partner organizations (including other federal departments and agencies, states, tribute authorities, non-Government organizations, faith-based organizations, the Private Sector, and partner nations), to include M&S support for scenario development and refinement, and database tailoring and update; M&S site survey and preparation; and M&S exercise execution support (including hardware and software setup/teardown, M&S-related information technology (IT) support, user training, role player and control cell support, and live database and scenario updates); and M&S-related post-exercise support (including playback capability and capture of M&S lessons learned). (TO1, PWS titled Task Order 1 PWS for Base Operations, Task 2, para. 2.2.) Provide a scenario that demonstrates a Master Scenario Events List (MSEL) tool that coordinates with decentralized planning, creation, and execution of training (TO1 PWS, para 2.2.2.6)

Subfactor 3: Media Emulation Support - The offeror shall describe its approach to and demonstrate an understanding of the process and procedures for media emulation support (including mainstream media and social media) for DOD and non-DOD USNORTHCOM partners, to include: establishment and maintenance of a password-protected exercise media web portal, with customizable pages emulating relevant real-world social media sites (operable in a standalone mode or as an integrated module of the disaster management simulation); user account registration and management for up to 1200 simultaneous discrete user accounts;

exercise execution support (including IT support, user training, and social media role-playing);

and post-exercise support (including playback capability, capture of media-related lessons learned, and delivery of exercise-generated data). Establish a web portal for exercises. (Tasks 1 to 4, PWS titled Task Order 1 PWS for Base Operations, paras. 2.1. to 2.3 – 2.3.19.)

Subfactor 4: Program Management and Staffing - The offeror shall present a Program Management and Staffing approach that explains how it will meet PWS requirements. (TO1, PWS titled Task Order 1 PWS for Base Operations, Tasks 1 to 5, paras. 2.1. to 2.4.). The approach shall not include employee names or resumes.

a. Completed Labor Matrix (Attachment 4- DMS-MES Pricing) identifying proposed labor categories, hours, and technical certifications. Add security clearance by labor category.

b. Provide an approach that demonstrates an understanding of Program Management for the overall Basic IDIQ PWS and TO1 PWS for the DMS-MES requirement to include:

i. A sound methodology for recruiting personnel and ensuring they have the training and security clearances necessary IAW TO1, PWS Task 1 through 5 requirements by the required date.

ii. A sound methodology to ensure continuity of services during personnel absences due to sickness, leave and voluntary and involuntary termination from employment such that impact to the Government is minimal.

2.2 Volume II - Price (Tab A and Tab B Unlimited Pages). The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government to determine price reasonableness, balanced pricing and affordability, and for preparing contract documents and supporting file. This volume will include Tab A Pricing, and Tab B Other Additional Documents.

2.2.1 The Offeror’s proposal shall include the following:

a. TAB A Pricing

Price Information. The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the Contracting Officer’s opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested.

However, if at any time during this competition the Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, Offerors may be required to submit information other than cost or pricing data to support a determination of price reasonableness IAW FAR 15.403-3.

(1) DMS-MES Labor Matrix: Contractor shall provide a matrix that shows the labor categories, labor categories’ definition (experience, education, certification), and labor rates that will be used for all Task Orders. The contractor shall use Attachment 4, DMS-MES Pricing (Tab 1 – Labor Matrix).

(2) Task Order Pricing: Contractor shall provide pricing for DMS-MES Base Operation and Maintenance (Task Order 1). The contractor shall use Attachment 4, DMS-MES Pricing (Tab 2 – TO Pricing). All dollar amounts for all CLINs/subCLINs shall be proposed in whole dollar amounts.

(3) Price list for Task 3 Non-DoD Exercises. The contractor shall provide a price for each line item to include option years for CONUS and OCONUS. The contractor shall use Attachment 4, DMS-MES Pricing (Tab 3 – Pre-priced Services).

b. TAB B Other Additional Documents

Tab 1: Completed Standard Form 1449 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award). Completed form signed by the Offeror 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.

Tab 2: Acknowledgement of all amendments. Each Offeror must sign and return one copy of the Standard Form (SF) 30 by the date specified on the form.

Tab 3: Completed 52.212-3, Offeror’s Representations (Prime). Submit the completed representation or certification.

Tab 4: Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI): The Contracting Officer has determined that there is no current OCI IAW FAR 9.505 and based on an initial analysis utilizing the AFSPC Mandatory Procedures OCI checklist. If any future OCIs should occur, then the Offeror shall submit an OCI plan to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate any identified OCIs.

Tab 5: Teaming Arrangements: Provide complete information as to the arrangement and relationship and copies of any teaming agreements. FAR 9.104 will be used to determine responsibility for teaming arrangement/agreements. Subcontractor management will be

IAW FAR 52.244-2.

Tab 6: Pricing Period: Offerors must agree to hold the prices in their offers firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

Tab 7: Professional Compensation Plan: - The Offeror and subcontractors/teaming partners/joint venture partners shall submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefit package proposed for the prime's professional employees. The prime Offeror should instruct its subcontractors to submit their total compensation plan directly to the contracting officer. The prime Offeror shall also submit a list of the subcontractors to include points of contact and phone numbers who will be submitting professional employee compensation packages to the Government. The total compensation plan submitted in the proposal will not become part of the awarded contract. The plan shall set forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for professional employees as prescribed in the instructions below:

Total Compensation Plan. Provide the planned compensation for all professional employee labor categories proposed to perform the effort. Describe the job skills and qualification requirements associated with each identified labor category. Identify the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code for each labor category using the Bureau of Labor Statistics SOC system. <http://www.bls.gov/soc/> The labor categories shall be identified by geographic location of contract performance. Provide the corresponding salary and quantified fringe benefits for each labor category and skill level. The fringe benefit data shall also include a description of the benefits offered, and to which professional employee category(ies) the fringe benefits would apply.

Surveys and Studies. Provide the recent surveys and studies from professional, public, and private organizations (e.g., Watson & Wyatt, Economic Research Institute, Bureau of Labor Statistics, etc.) used to support the proposed salaries and fringes. Identify the source with the provided surveys and studies. If not using one of the sources listed above, explain the credibility of the source providing the surveys and studies.

2.3 Budget Information.

a. The projected budget amount Task Order 1, Basic Operation and Maintenance portions for this requirement is estimated at $22.5M for one (1) base year, four (4) one-year option periods, and one (1) six-month extension, if exercised.

b. The minimum guarantee is $25K.

2.4 IDIQ Ceiling Information. The ceiling amount for the single award IDIQ contract is $76M.

2.5 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub-factors. Offerors 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, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of the following Table:

Solicitation Exceptions Solicitation Document Page/Paragraph Requirement/Portion Rationale Basic IDIQ PWS, TO

1 PWS

Applicable page and paragraph numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met

52.212-2 EVALUATION- COMMERCIAL ITEMS

1.0 Award Without Discussions. As set forth in FAR 52.212-1(g), the Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions with Offerors. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer (CO) to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest; accept other than the lowest offer; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.

1.1 Basis for Contract Award. This contract will be awarded as a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract utilizing a Tradeoff Source Selection Process. The Government’s award decision will be based upon a tradeoff between technical and price. Past performance will not be evaluated for this requirement; however FAR 9.104 will be used to determine the Offeror is responsible.

1.2.1 Proposals will be evaluated based on a technical/price trade-off, where technical is approximately equal to price. The Government reserves the right to award a contract to a higher priced Offeror if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines the perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal merits the additional price. This allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal and make an integrated best value assessment award decision.

1.2.1.1. While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, this source selection process, by its nature, is subjective and, therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

1.2.1.2. By submission of its offer in accordance with the instructions provided in clause FAR 52.212-1, Instructions To Offerors and Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, the Offeror accedes to the terms of this model contract and all such offers shall be treated equally except for their prices and performance records.

1.3 Small Business Set-Aside. This acquisition is a full small business set-aside under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 541511, Custom Computer Programming Services, with a small business size standard of $27.5 million. An Offeror determined to be other than small business cannot receive contract award.

Offerors are strongly encouraged to avoid proposed business arrangements that could be construed as other than small business in consideration of the Small Business Administration (SBA) Ostensible Subcontractor Rule.

1.4 Competitive Best Value. This is a competitive best value source selection using DoD Source Selection Procedures. This allows for a tradeoff between non-cost factors and cost/price and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to achieve a best-valued contract award. Technical is approximately equal to price. Therefore, award will be made to the Offeror that provides the best overall value in terms of priced and non-priced factors.

1.5 Prices. Prices will be evaluated in accordance with para. 2.2 Price Factor. All technically acceptable proposals will be evaluated for price reasonableness. Price is not assigned a rating; however, an assessment of reasonableness, balanced pricing and affordability will be performed.

1.6 Award. Only one (1) award will be made as a result of this solicitation.

1.7 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI): The CO has determined that there is no current OCI IAW FAR

9.505 and based on an initial analysis utilizing the AFSPC Mandatory Procedures Checklist.

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/52_000.htm

a. If any future OCIs should occur, then the Offerors shall submit an OCI plan to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate any identified future OCIs. Ongoing, limited exchanges may take place regarding OCI concerns, questions or clarifications; these exchanges will not constitute discussions. OCI Prevention/Mitigation Plans will be reviewed in accordance with FAR Part 9 to ensure all potential OCIs can be sufficiently avoided, neutralized, or mitigated.

b. All OCI issues must be resolved before FPR request and all OCI matters must be resolved prior to award. Refer to FAR 9.506 for further guidance.

1.8 Evaluation Process. A Combined Technical/Risk Ratings will be applied. The Pricing Factor Volume II will be evaluated for price reasonableness, balanced pricing and affordability.

The evaluation process to be used is as follows:

a. Step 1: Evaluate all proposals using a color and an adjectival rating that will be assigned in accordance with para 2.1.1.2.1, Table 1 Combined Technical/Risk Ratings that reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements (factor or sub-factors) through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies and risks of a proposal.

b. Step 2: Evaluate all proposals to determine price reasonableness, (in accordance with FAR 15.404 and FAR 31.201-3), balanced (in accordance with FAR 15.404-1), and affordable (within any budgetary information included in the solicitation); then rank by total evaluated price.

c. Step 3: If a competitive range is established and discussions are to be conducted, they will be IAW

DoD Source Selection Procedures. The Government reserves the right to eliminate offerors for the purposes of efficiency.

d. Step 4: Proposals will be evaluated based on a technical/price trade-off, where technical is approximately equal to price. Award can be made to a higher priced Offeror if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines the perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal merit the additional price.

1.9 Technical Rating Evalution Process. The technical rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal.

2.0 Evaluation Factors. In evaluating proposals, the Government will select the proposal that is most advantageous to the Government. To arrive at a decision, the SSA will assess each offer in accordance with the following evaluation factors for the contract:

Factor 1: Technical Capability Subfactor 1 - Infrastructure Management Subfactor 2 - Exercise M&S Support Subfactor 3 - Media Emulation Support Subfactor 4 - Program Management and Staffing

Factor 2: Price Tab A - Pricing Information includes:

• DMS-MES Labor Matrix

• Task Order Pricing

• Price list for Task 3 Non-DoD Exercises

Task Order pricing includes: The total price for the base year and all option periods will be evaluated for price reasonableness, balanced pricing and affordability. All proposals will be ranked by total evaluated price. Total evaluated price includes the price of all services, supplies, and equipment for the base year and all option year periods to include the 6-month extension period.

Tab B - Other Additional Documents includes:

• Tab 1: Completed Standard Form 1449 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award)

• Tab 2: Acknowledgement of all amendments

• Tab 3: Completed 52.212-3, Offeror’s Representations (Prime

• Tab 4: Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI)

• Tab 5: Pricing Period

• Tab 6: Professional Compensation Plan

2.1 Technical Factor. The Technical evaluation provides an assessment of the Offeror’s demonstrated approach to meet the Government’s requirements and will be rated based on Table 1, Combined Technical/Risk Ratings (para

2.1.1.2.1 below). The combined technical/risk ratings includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

2.1.1 Technical Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the Technical Capability Volume to assess the Offeror’s approach to determine if it is sufficient to successfully perform the tasks and services outlined in the PWS.

The Combined Technical/Risk Rating will be used. This includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings IAW Table 1, paragraph 2.1.1.2.1.

2.1.1.2 Technical Capability Volume I shall be evaluated for clear demonstration of the Offeror’s proposed approach to successfully accomplish the following from the proposed evaluation factors being considered on a Combined Technical/Risk using Table 1 in para 2.1.1.2.1 below. The proposal shall be evaluated against the following subfactor criteria. Each subfactor is of equal importance.

Task Order 1

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Subfactor 1: Infrastructure Management: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Technical Volume and its proposed approach in response to Infrastructure Management. (TO 1, Task 1, PWS para.

2.1.). This subfactor is met when the offeror presents an effective approach to this effort that meets the following criteria:

a. Their ability to operate on standalone and on DoD networks with the required documentation of certification and accreditation of work performed.

b. A DMS-MES schedule matrix that demonstrates the process and procedures for disaster management simulation and media emulation including sufficient software, hardware, integration with related components, licensing, registration and credentialing, user training, maintenance, and scheduling infrastructure to support multiple independent DOD and non-DOD exercises, operating on standalone networks or DOD nonsecure or secure networks, with scheduling deconfliction, exercise scalability, scenario tailorability, and annual network recertification.

Subfactor 2: Exercise M&S Support: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Technical Volume and its proposed approach in response to Exercise M&S Support. (TO1, PWS, Task 2, para. 2.2.). This subfactor is met when the offeror presents an approach that demonstrates the effort that meets the following criteria:

a. An understanding of the processes and procedures for DMS-MES and M&S support for DoD, National Guard Bureau (NGB), and non-DoD partner organizations for scenario development and refinement, database tailoring and updates; M&S site survey and preparation; and M&S exercise execution support; and M&S related post-exercise support.

b. Describe how a Master Scenario Events Lists (MSEL) of requirements, provided via unclassified electronic format, are to be supported through realistic associated media emulated traditional and social media using the same functional capabilities listed in the Summary/Checklist of Functional Capabilities chart

(TO1 2.1.6).

Subfactor 3: Media Emulation Support: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Technical Volume and its proposed approach in response to Media Emulation Support. (TO1, PWS, Tasks 1 to 4, paras. 2.1. to 2.3.). This subfactor is met when the offeror presents an approach that demonstrates the effort that meets the following criteria:

a. An understanding of the processes and procedures for media emulation support for DoD and non-DoD partners.

b. Describe the Social Media Web Portal to be provided; including its functional capabilities, to include those functions listed in the Summary/Checklist of Functional Capabilities chart (TO1, PWS, para 2.3.19).

Subfactor 4: Program Management and Staffing: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Technical Volume and its proposed approach in response to Program Management and Staffing. (TO1, PWS Tasks 1 to 5, paras. 2.1. to 2.4.). This subfactor is met when the offeror presents an effective staffing and retention approach for this effort that meets the following criteria:

a. An organizational structure that provides labor categories; qualified and appropriately commercially certified personnel resources, to include any subcontracting and teaming arrangements;

minimum acceptable qualifications at initiation of contract; and proposed shift hours for each site (TO1, PWS Task 1 to 5).

b. Provide an approach that demonstrates an understanding of Program Management for the overall Basic IDIQ PWS and TO1 PWS for the DMS-MES requirement to include:

iii. A sound methodology for recruiting personnel and ensuring they have the training and security clearances necessary IAW (TO1, PWS Task 1 through 5) requirements by the required date.

iv. A sound methodology to ensure continuity of services during personnel absences due to sickness, leave and voluntary and involuntary termination from employment such that impact to the Government is minimal.

2.1.1.2.1 Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluation shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed below:

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.

Proposal is unawardable.

“Strength" is defined as an aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

“Weakness” is defined as a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

“Risk” is defined as the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor/sub-factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

“Deficiency” is defined as a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful task order performance to an unacceptable level.

2.2 Price Factor. The Price evaluation assesses each Offeror’s total proposed price and evaluates each Offeror’s proposal for reasonableness, balanced pricing and affordability. An assessment that the Offeror’s total evaluated price is not reasonable or affordable will result in the Offeror being considered unawardable for award. Adequate price information must be submitted by the Offeror to support a determination of price reasonableness and affordability. The burden of proof for price reasonableness and affordability rests with the Offeror.

2.3 Price Evaluation. The Government will rank all offers by Total Evaluated Price (TEP), including all option prices for Task Order 1. The Offeror shall complete and submit Section J, Attachment 4 – Pricing as its pricing submission. Offerors whose TEP is unreasonable (in accordance with FAR 15.404 and FAR 31.201-3), unbalanced (IAW FAR 15.404-1), or unaffordable (not within any budgetary information included in the solicitation) will not be considered for award. The Offeror’s proposal shall represent the Offeror’s best efforts to respond to the solicitation.

All technically acceptable proposals will be evaluated for price reasonableness. Price is not assigned a rating;

however, an assessment of reasonableness and affordability will be performed. Offerors shall provide a summary in Volume II to explain price or cost information.

a. Price Reasonableness. The techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1(b) will be used to assess proposal reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business [reference FAR 31.2013(a)]. If the Contracting Officer determines that Adequate Price Competition (APC) has not been obtained, reasonableness will be evaluated using cost analysis techniques describe in FAR 15.404-1.

b. Balanced Pricing. The techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1(g) will be the primary means of assessing unbalanced pricing. The Government shall analyze offers to determine whether there are unbalanced separately priced line items. Offerors’ proposals will be evaluated with respect to unbalanced pricing for all proposed CLINs as referenced in TEP. An Offeror whose proposal is determined to be unbalanced may be determined unawardable if the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government (FAR 15.404-1(g), Unbalanced Pricing.

c. Affordability. The affordability assessment will consider the total estimated contract prices as compared to the Task Order 1 estimated budget of $22.5M.