FA4452-12-R-0001 Amd 0002.doc

FA4452-12-R-0001-0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 06-Jun-2012 04:30 PM to 29-May-2012 03:00 PM.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0001

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 8.00 from 12.00 to 4.00.

CLIN 5001

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 7.00 from 12.00 to 5.00.

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0001 has been changed from:

POP 01-MAY-2013 TO

31-AUG-2013

DERRICK CURTIS

203 W LOSEY ST

SCOTT AFB IL 62225 5223

229-6383

FOB: Destination

F3SF55

To:

POP 01-MAY-2013 TO

31-AUG-2013

DERRICK CURTIS

203 W LOSEY ST

SCOTT AFB IL 62225 5223

229-6383

F3SF55

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 5001 has been changed from:

POP 01-SEP-2017 TO

31-JAN-2018

DERRICK CURTIS

203 W LOSEY ST

SCOTT AFB IL 62225 5223

229-6383

F3SF55

To:

POP 01-SEP-2017 TO

31-JAN-2018

DERRICK CURTIS

203 W LOSEY ST

SCOTT AFB IL 62225 5223

229-6383

F3SF55

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

SECTION L

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents

L-I ‑ INFORMATION TO OFFERORS (ITO) and INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION

1.0 General Instructions

(a) The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by this ITO and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), and Request For Proposal (RFP). Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

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

(c) Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

(d) The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the model contract/solicitation. The offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid through 1 Feb 13 or date of award, whichever is later.

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

1.1 General Information

1.1.1. Point of Contact

The Contracting Officer (CO) and Contract Specialist (CS) are the sole points of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO and CS. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO and CS at the address located in Section A of the solicitation.

1.1.2. Debriefings

The CO and CS 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. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a preaward debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a postaward debriefing. However, offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The CO and CS will notify unsuccessful offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

1.1.3. Discrepancies

If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CO and CS in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the CO and CS to consider as related to the omission or error. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

1.1.4. Electronic Reference Documents

All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website at http://www.fedbizopps.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

1.1.5 Communications

Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the CO and CS. Email may be used to transmit such information to offerors only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via mail i.e., USPS, FedEx, or UPS.

1.1.6 Amendments to Solicitation

If this Request for Proposal (RFP) is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this request by the day and time specified in the amendment(s).

1.1.7 Use of Non-Government Personnel in Source Selection

(a) It is the Government’s intent to utilize non-Government advisors in the conduct of this source selection. Offerors are advised that data, including proprietary data, submitted to the Government in response to this solicitation will be released to non-Government advisors for review and analysis.

(b) The Non-Government advisors whom will be involved in this source selection and the manner in which they will be involved are as follows:

MITRE Corporation: Employees of this firm will serve as non-voting advisors to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). These advisors may be required to provide advice regarding proposal strengths and weaknesses but will not determine ratings or rankings of offerors’ proposals. Non-Government advisors will be prohibited from reviewing Past Performance information. All participants have signed nondisclosure agreements.

(c) Submission of offeror’s proposal in response to this request for proposal will constitute acceptance of non-Governmental personnel participation as advisors in the source selection. If the offeror has any objection to Non-Government advisors access to its proposal information, the offeror shall provide grounds and justification for its objections to the CO no later than 10 calendar days before proposals are due. The CO will then make a determination whether the non-Government advisor(s) shall be permitted to participate in the source selection. The CO will inform objecting offeror of the final determination, and, if the use of non-Government advisors has been changed, will inform all offerors of the change.

1.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table 1.2 below). The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 1.2. The attachments identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below:

Table 1.2 - Proposal Organization

Number

*Limit past performance volume to 4 pages per contract submitted and no more than 3 contracts for prime and 2 contracts for each significant subcontractor. Complete a Past Performance Information Sheet (PPIS) located at Section J, Attachment 6 for each contract submitted.

1.2.1 Page Limitations

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and excess paper copies will be returned to the offeror as soon as practicable. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the offerors. Each page shall be counted except the following:

Cover pages, tables of contents, tabs, glossaries, and resumes.

1.2.1.1. Page Size and Format

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

(b) Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and count as a single page. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 12 point.

1.2.2 Cost or Pricing Related Data

Pricing information shall be addressed in Volume V, Contract Documentation, in Section B of the Schedule of the RFP. Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) shall be priced. However, supporting documentation for prices shall be included in Volume IV, Cost/ Price. Include supporting data to substantiate the reasonableness of the proposed CLIN prices. At a minimum, supporting data for FFP CLIN shall include: allocation of personnel by labor category, hours, and fully burdened hourly rates. At a minimum, supporting data for CPFF CLIN shall include: allocation of personnel by labor category, hours, and fully burdened hourly rates with exception of profit (fee). All significant assumptions, scope limitations, and/or qualifications of the proposal shall be addressed and explained. Your cost/price proposal shall include the three month transition period (if applicable), four month base period, four twelve month option periods, and one five month period of performance.

1.2.3 Cross-Referencing

Each volume shall be written on a stand‑alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted. However, offerors shall provide a Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix indicating by ITO, PWS, and specification paragraph number, the corresponding proposal paragraph in that section which addresses the referenced item.

1.2.4 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections and will not count against page limitations.

1.2.5 Title Page

Each volume must include a title page. The title pages must show:

a. Solicitation Number

b. Name, address, telephone numbers and e-mail address of the offeror

1.2.6 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

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

1.2.7 Tables and Figures

Include an indexed list of Tables and Figures. This index will not count against page limitations.

1.2.8 Binding and Labeling

Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring, loose leaf binder permitting the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the offeror's name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

1.3 Electronic Offers

Electronic offers, alone, will not be accepted. However, each offeror is required to submit an identical electronic copy of their proposal on a CD no later than the required proposal due date. The CD shall be in addition to the required number of hard copies designated in Table 1.2 above. For electronic copies, indicate volume number and title, and use separate files to permit rapid location of information. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office 2007 suite of applications. In the event that hard copies and electronic copies of a proposal are submitted and if there are any discrepancies between the hard copies and the electronic copies of the proposal, the hard copies will be used for evaluation.

1.4 Distribution

The "original" proposal shall be identified. Proposals shall be addressed to the following and mailed or hand carried to:

AMC/A7KQC

Attn.: Solicitation FA4552-12-R-0001

Attn.: Karen Kinzel / Thomas Jaeger

507 Symington Drive, Room W202

Scott AFB IL 62225-5022

Access to Scott AFB for Delivery of Hand Carried Proposals: Offerors are cautioned that when hand-carrying proposals individuals not affiliated with this installation must obtain visitors’ passes prior to entrance. The Shiloh gate has been designated as the “Visitor’s Control Center”. Some delays can be anticipated for visitors to process through the “Visitor’s Control Center” and offerors should allow sufficient time to obtain visitors’ passes. Each visitor must have an onsite sponsor to obtain a visitor’s pass, please contact Thomas Jaeger at 618-256-9950 for more information.

Late proposals will be processed in accordance with the procedures identified in FAR 52.215-1(c) Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals.

2.0 Volume I ‑ Executive Summary

In the executive summary volume, the offeror shall provide the following information:

2.1 Narrative Summary

The narrative summary of the entire proposal should be concise, to include addressing the significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding cost/price. The salient features should tie in with Section M evaluation factors/subfactors. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

2.2 Table of Contents

Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal.

3.0 Volume II - Technical Volume

3.1 General

The Technical Volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying these subfactors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that your firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is not necessary or desirable for you to tell us so in your proposal. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

3.2 Format and Specific Content

3.2.1 Technical

In the technical volume, address your technical solution for meeting or exceeding the Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor as stated in Section M.

3.2.1.1 Technical Risk

Address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of your proposed technical solution (for each subfactor) you consider to have the potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Classify each risk in accordance with DoD Source Selection Procedures Table 3, Technical Risk Rating. Provide the rationale for each risk and its rating, including quantitative estimates of the impact on cost, schedule, and performance. Describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of its potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of other contract requirements. Propose a realistic "work‑around" or risk mitigators for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level. Identify and classify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation.

3.2.2 Volume Organization

The Technical volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

(1) Title Page

(2) Table of Contents

(3) List of Table and Figures

(4) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

(5) Cross Reference Matrix

(6) Technical Approach (Subfactor One)

(7) Staffing Approach (Subfactor Two)

(8) Risk Matrix

3.2.3 Subfactor One – Technical Approach

Each offeror shall provide an integrated technical approach. The technical plan shall represent the offeror’s approach to meeting overall PWS requirements. A draft Configuration Management Plan (Section J, Attachment 2 - CDRL B016), phase-in plan (as called for in Section J, Attachment 2 - CDRL A006, Management Plan), and draft Quality Program Plan (Section J, Attachment 2 - CDRL B015) shall be included in the offeror’s technical approach.

3.2.4 Subfactor Two – Staffing Approach

Each offeror shall provide a detailed and effective staffing plan. The staffing plan should represent the offeror’s approach to perform PWS tasks by identifying necessary personnel resources. A draft Technical and Management Work Plan (Section J, Attachment 2 - CDRL A001) shall be included in the offeror’s staffing approach.

Section M describes the measures of merit for each Technical subfactor.

4.0 Volume III - Past Performance

4.1 General

Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Section J, Attachment 6. This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposed to perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance.

Along with the information required in this paragraph, the offeror shall submit a consent letter (Section J, Attachment 7) executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter (Section J, Attachment 8), authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror's performance.

4.2 Early Proposal Information

Each offeror is requested to submit the information shown in Section J, Attachment 6 for each relevant contract 10 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals. Failure to submit early proposal information may result in offeror disqualification.

As soon as practicable, offerors shall complete Section 1 of the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Section J, Attachment 9) and email it and the Past Performance Questionnaire Cover Letter (Section J, Attachment 10) to points of contact (POCs) the offeror has listed in the PPIS (Section J, Attachment 6). The POCs listed in the PPIS’s should represent the individuals most knowledgeable about the offeror’s performance on the identified contract or program, such as the following: (1) Contracting Officer’s Representative; (2) Program/Project Manager; (3) Contracting Officer. The POCs will complete the questionnaires and forward them by email directly to the Contract Specialist, Thomas Jaeger at thomas.jaeger.1@us.af.mil. RESPONDENTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRES SHALL NOT SEND THE COMPLETED INFORMATION SHEETS BACK TO THE OFFEROR. The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will conduct follow-up with any POC as necessary. The SSEB will evaluate no more than 3 PPQs (total) for each offeror/team. If more than 3 PPQs are received, a maximum of 3 will be evaluated in the order in which they were received via email by the Contract Specialist. PPQs shall be due to the Contract Specialist 10 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals. The Contracting Officer will use discretion in accepting PPQs received after the requested date.

4.3 Relevant Contracts

Submit information in accordance with Section J, Attachment 6 on no more than 3 recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. Also include information on no more than 2 recent contracts performed by each of your significant subcontractors that you consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort. Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance. For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining recency and relevance, see Section M, M002 - Evaluation Factors, paragraph M002c - Past Performance Factor. Each PPIS shall not exceed 4 pages.

4.3.1 Specific Content

Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a limited or no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror is required to clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the offeror to be considered a higher confidence candidate. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an offeror has overcome past problems is required. Categorize the relevant information into the specific Technical subfactors and Cost/Price factor used to evaluate the proposal.

4.3.2 Organizational Structure Change History

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

5.0 Volume IV - Cost/Price

5.1 General Instructions

5.1.1 Cost/Price Reasonableness and Realism

This section is to assist you in submitting data other than certified cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness of your proposed cost/price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. In the event that price analysis techniques at FAR 15.404 are insufficient to establish a fair and reasonable price determination, other proposal analysis techniques may be used. Specifically, the Government reserves the right to evaluate the realism of each offeror’s proposed costs. This will include an evaluation of the extent to which proposed costs are sufficient for the work to be performed, reflective of a clear understanding of the requirements, and consistent with the unique methods of performance and materials described in the offeror’s technical proposal (FAR 15.404-1(d)(1) and 2.101). Note that unrealistically low or high proposed costs or prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or has submitted an unrealistic proposal. When the Government evaluates an offer as unrealistically low compared to the anticipated costs of performance and offeror fails to explain these underestimated costs, the Government will consider, under the Technical risk rating, the offerors lack of understanding of the technical requirements of the applicable Technical subfactor. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and realism. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the offeror.

5.1.2 Cost/Price Data

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

5.1.3 Cost or Pricing Data Requirements

In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), data other than certified cost or pricing data will be required to support a determination of price reasonableness. Info shall be provided IAW FAR 15.403-5. If, after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient data available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit additional data other than certified cost or pricing data.

5.1.4 Rounding

All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. All fully burdened labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny.

5.2 Volume Organization

The Cost/Price volume shall consist of the following sections:

SECTION 1 ‑ Table of Contents; summary descriptions of estimating, purchasing, accounting systems, and Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Disclosure Statement; changes to estimating, purchasing, accounting practices, and/or CAS Disclosure Statement.

SECTION 2 – Data other than certified cost or pricing data, to include estimating methodology. Ensure the cost/price proposal includes detailed cost/price amounts of all resources required to accomplish the task, (i.e. labor categories, labor hours, number of employees for each labor category, rates, travel, incidental equipment, etc.). These hourly requirements are to include (but separately identify) subcontractor(s) and inter-divisional transfer(s) hours. Labor and overhead rates should include sufficient detail to sustain a DCAA audit (e.g. Direct Labor Rates, Overhead, Fringe Benefits, G&A, and Fee, etc.). The estimated hours provided in Section J, Attachment 6 are provided as a general guide to the scope of the effort required. Offerors are cautioned to propose the most efficient organization consisting of the optimum utilization of management, labor categories, labor hours, and costs per task that realistically portray the support required to provide the services described in the specifications documents to the level described in the service summary. Your proposal shall include travel estimated at $35,000.00 IAW Section J, Attachment 12, and identified as not-to-exceed (NTE) Government estimated travel. Your proposal shall also include estimated ODCs at $700,000.00 IAW Section J, Attachment 12, and identified as NTE Government estimated ODCs. All contractor proposed Material Handling Fees (MHF) for ODC expenses shall be clearly provided as a percentage in this section of your cost/price proposal. Cost/price evaluations will take into consideration the proposed MHF. If you propose a MHF, charges for MHF shall not be included in the fully burdened labor rates required above. Any additional Travel or ODCs you deem necessary may be provided separately and identified as contractor proposed travel and ODCs. All additional travel must show the specific detail, if known (i.e. Number of days, locations, number of personnel, etc.). All ODCs shall annotate the specific detail (qty, part number, manufacturer, etc.) to include supporting documentation to justify the cost (i.e. vendor quotes, price history, etc.) If a subcontractor relationship exists, the subcontractor must break out their costs, in accordance with the above requirements. If needed, the subcontractor may submit their unsanitized cost breakout directly to the CO. If applicable, travel shall be authorized by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), in writing, prior to performance and will be paid IAW FAR 31.205-46. The contractor will be authorized to invoice monthly for all approved travel costs incurred and approved by the COR. Your cost/price proposal shall include the three month transition period (if required), four month base period, four twelve month option periods, and one five month period of performance.

SECTION 3 – Provide your firm's rationale for how the cost/price data presented in Section 2 reflects the complexity and magnitude of the services to be provided for each task. Also explain how your subcontracting team addresses the complexity of the magnitude of the services to be provided. Provide a discussion of the financial and human resource risks involved in being able to provide satisfactory level resources needed considering the op tempo (often resulting in unpredictable schedule changes) and complexity of the services being provided; and how your firm's resource planning reflected in the labor breakout and cost/price proposal addresses those risks.

SECTION 4 – Provide a separate set of labor rates for each labor category anticipated to be used for PWS subtask 12 identified in PWS paragraph 1.3.4.12., “Future Negotiated.” These rates will be used to negotiate numbers of hours required to accomplish “Future Negotiated” tasks identified in PWS paragraph 1.3.4.12. These rates shall be fully burdened FFP rates. Labor rates for this section shall be provided in the following format for each period of performance:

Labor Rates for “Future Negotiated” Tasks (as described in PWS para 1.3.4.12.)

6.0 Volume V ‑ Contract Documentation

6.1 RFP/Representations and Certifications

The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file. The offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the RFP, and Sections A through K.

6.1.1 Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

Completion of blocks 12, 13, 14, 15a, 15b, 16 (15c if applicable) and signature and date for blocks 17 and 18 of the SF33. Signature by the offeror on the SF33 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.

6.1.2 Section B - Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices

Completed pricing information in Section B of the RFP. The offeror shall insert its proposed price for each CLIN in the spaces provided. Cost/price shall reflect all costs/prices associated with providing GATES tasks. All prices shall be rounded to the nearest dollar.

6.1.3 Section J - List of Attachments

Each offeror is required to complete sections 6a, 6b, 6c, 7a, 7b, and 7c of the DD Form 254 found at Section J, Attachment 5. The DD254 shall be submitted in Volume V, Contract Documentation.

6.1.4 Section K - Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors

Completed representations, certifications, acknowledgments and statements. These shall be submitted as a separate attachment to the Contract Documentation Volume. In addition, compliance with the clause at DFARS 252.209-7999, Representation by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law, is mandatory. Complete the appropriate fill-in portions of subparagraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2).

6.1.5 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 subfactors. 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 Table 6.1.5.

Table 6.1.5 - Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation Document Page/ Paragraph Requirement/ Portion Rationale

Page and Paragraph

Numbers

why the requirement can/will not be met

6.2 Other Information Required

6.2.1 Authorized Offeror Personnel

Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

6.2.2 Government Offices

Provide the mailing address, telephone and fax numbers and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, DCAA, and Government Paying Office. Also, provide the name, email, telephone and fax number for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).

6.2.3 Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations

Provide company/division's street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; DUNS code; TIN; size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation. This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other location(s). List all locations where work is to be performed and indicate whether such facility is a division, affiliate, or subcontractor, and the percentage of work to be performed at each location.

6.2.4 Attachments to the RFP

The offeror shall provide the following as attachments to the model contract:

6.2.4.1 Subcontracting Plan - Participation of Small Businesses (SB), Historically Black Colleges and Universities, or Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI) If the offeror is other than a small business, the offeror shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns; FAR 52.219-9 Alternate II, Small Business Subcontracting Plan; and DFARS 252.219-7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracts) that also identifies and specifies the extent of offeror's commitment to the participation of small businesses (SB), historically black colleges or universities (HBCU) and minority institutions (MI), whether as joint venture members, teaming arrangement partners, or subcontractors. If applicable, submit a copy of your approved Master Plan. In the event the offeror has negotiated a comprehensive subcontracting plan pursuant to DFARS 219.702, the offeror must submit the information that identifies and specifies the extent of its commitment to the participation of SB, HBCU and MI. The plan must demonstrate an overall goal of at least 25% of the total contract value committed towards small businesses. However, the distribution of planned dollars allotted to individual types of small businesses (i.e. VOSB, SDVOSB, WOSB, HUBZone, etc.) is at the offeror’s discretion.

This factor will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. Failure to submit such a plan will render the offeror ineligible for further consideration in this source selection. In other words, if an offeror’s small business subcontracting plan does not meet the aforementioned requirements, the offeror’s proposal may be disqualified from further consideration.

6.2.4.2 Earned Value Management System (EVMS) plan

The offeror shall submit evidence that the offeror’s EVMS plan is compliant with the guidelines in the American National Standards Institute/Electronic Industries Alliance Standard 748, Earned Value Management Systems (ANSI/EIA-748). A written determination certified by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) shall constitute such evidence. The contractor shall maintain compliance with the ANSI/EIA-748 EVMS guidelines at time of award and throughout the life of the contract. In the event an offeror does not submit an approved EVMS plan, the offeror will be found not in compliance with solicitation terms and conditions, rated technically unacceptable and may be removed from the competition.

6.2.4.3 SEI CMMI – Configuration Management (CM) Level 3 Rating

Offerors shall be rated SEI CMMI – CM Level 3 at time of award and throughout the life of the contract. The offeror shall submit evidence that the offeror has been appraised and currently rated as such. A copy of the original certificate showing current standing as an SEI CMMI – CM Level 3 rated organization shall constitute evidence.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTION M

Evaluation Factors for Award

M001 SOURCE SELECTION

a. Basis for Contract Award

This is a best value source selection conducted in accordance with the DoD Source Selection Procedures referenced at DFARS 215.300, effective 20 September 2011. The Government will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of Technical/Technical Risk, Past Performance, and Cost/Price. Small Business Participation will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis but not part of the integrated assessment. A contract may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation) and is judged, based on the evaluation factors and subfactors to represent the best value to the Government. The Government seeks to award to the offeror who gives the Air Force the greatest confidence that it will best meet, or exceed, the requirements. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the technical and/or overall business approach and past performance of the higher price offeror outweighs the cost difference. The SSA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation (described below). While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

b. Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government intends to award one contract for the GATES Program. However, the Government reserves the right to make no award at all.

c. Rejection of Unrealistic Offers

The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low in cost when compared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.

M002 EVALUATION FACTORS

a. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors

(1) The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

Factor 1: Technical/Technical Risk

Subfactor 1: Technical Approach

Subfactor 2: Staffing Approach

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Cost/Price

(2) Relative Importance of Factors and Subfactors. The relative importance of each factor and subfactor is as follows: Technical/Technical Risk, Past Performance and Cost/Price are of equal importance. Within the Technical Factor, the subfactors are of equal importance.

In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than Cost/Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Cost/Price.

(3) Small Business Participation: If other than a small business, the offeror is required to submit a small business subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns; FAR 52.219-9 Alternate II, Small Business Subcontracting Plan; and DFARS 252.219-7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracts). The plan must demonstrate an overall goal of at least 25% of the total contract value committed towards small businesses. This factor will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. Refer to requirement in Section L, paragraph 6.2.4.1 for inclusion of subcontracting plan. Failure to submit such a plan will render the offeror ineligible for further consideration in this source selection. If an offeror’s small business subcontracting plan does not meet the aforementioned requirements, the offeror’s proposal may be disqualified from further consideration.

b. Technical Factor

The Technical evaluation provides for two distinct but related assessments: the Technical Rating and the Technical Risk Rating. These two ratings have equal impact for the rating of each Technical subfactor.

(1) Technical Rating. The technical rating provides an assessment of the quality of the offeror’s solution for meeting the Government’s requirement. Each Technical subfactor will receive one of the color ratings described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 2 – Technical Ratings, excerpted below. They focus on the strengths and deficiencies of the offeror's proposal. The color rating depicts how well the offeror’s proposal meets the Technical subfactor requirements. Subfactor ratings shall not be rolled up into an overall color rating for the Technical factor.

TABLE 2 - TECHNICAL RATINGS

Subfactor 1: Technical Approach – Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical approach based on the following measures of merit:

Provides a detailed and effective plan that demonstrates the capability, knowledge, and expertise to:

(i) Develop, test, and document software solutions supporting engineered ITV and port management solutions incorporating AIT components. Demonstration includes: analysis techniques and alternative solutions to support the proposed development process; design, present, and document compliant software solutions to Government guidance and architectures cited in the PWS; test and implement solutions in existing Government environments and on Government furnished equipment; and interface with the Government requirements processes and products and what strategies will be used to maximize requirements implementation.

(ii) Provide the operations support required by the PWS, specifically addressing the ability to field solutions to all GATES locations, provide technical support, perform Functional Help Desk activities, and provide training.

(iii) Provide security engineering certification and accreditation (C&A) support. Demonstration includes technique to support DoD mandated C&A processes, including the DoD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP), and vulnerability management procedures.

(iv) Develop, maintain, and execute a Configuration Management Plan describing the processes and procedures employed for all development work products needed to meet the PWS. Provide a draft Configuration Management Plan per CDRL B016 (Section J, Attachment 2).

(v) Provide asset management and hardware purchasing.

(vi) Complete phase-in actions necessary for the contractor to acquire and organize its resources to meet the contract schedule. Provide a phase-in plan as required by CDRL A006, Management Plan, located in Section J, Attachment 2.

(vii) Develop, maintain, and execute a Quality Program Plan describing the internal process and corrective action controls that will ensure the Government receives the deliverables and quality of service described in the PWS. Provide a draft Quality Program Plan per CDRL B015 located in Section J, Attachment 2.

Subfactor 2: Staffing Approach – Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed staffing approach based on the following measures of merit:

(i) Provides a detailed and effective staffing plan as reflected in a personnel matrix, which identifies the necessary personnel resources for performing PWS tasks. Matrix details the organizational structure with assignment of functions, duties, and responsibilities of each position. An accompanying narrative demonstrates how the combination of people assigned to each task provides a sufficient knowledge and experience base for that task, including the proposed workforce certification composition used to meet DODD 8570.01M and DODI 8500.2 requirements. Matrix shall not identify individuals by name, but rather, provide generic descriptions applicable to any person filling the proposed position. However, provide a specific resume for each person filling key personnel positions, as determined by the offeror based on the offeror’s technical solution and corresponding staffing approach. Provide a draft Technical and Management Work Plan per CDRL A001 located in Section J, Attachment 2.

(ii) Provides evidence of your company’s ability to acquire and maintain highly experienced management personnel in order to provide for efficient use of the labor skill mix proposed and the number of management hours proposed to execute contract requirements.

(iii) Provides a description of the organizational interfaces between prime contractor and subcontractors necessary to accomplish the tasks. Demonstration includes the ability to organize and manage proposed subcontractor agreements and the subcontractor’s project roles/responsibilities that may be required in the performance and completion of the tasks.

In arriving at a best value decision, the Government reserves the right to give positive consideration, i.e., assign a strength, for performance in excess of objective requirements.

(2) Technical Risk Rating. Assessment of Technical Risk, which is manifested by the identification of weakness(es), considers potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

The Technical subfactors will receive one of the Technical Risk ratings described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 3 – Technical Risk Ratings, excerpted below. The risk rating considers the risk associated with the technical approach in meeting the requirement.