ASSC_RFP_L-M_28_Apr_16_Amendment_1.pdf

FA4610-16-R-0001

SECTION L CONTINUED

L.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

L.1.1 The Offeror’s proposal shall include all data and information requested in Section L and shall be submitted in accordance with these instructions. In developing the proposal, the Offeror shall comply with all the requirements contained in the Request for Proposal (RFP). Non-conformance with the instructions provided in the RFP may result in a proposal being ineligible for award. The government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.306(a)(3).

L.1.2 The Offeror’s proposal shall be clear and concise and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not rephrase or restate the government’s requirements, but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. The Offeror shall assume that the government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s experience. The government will make its evaluation solely based on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal.

L.1.3 The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the RFP. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of Volume III – Contract Documentation of the Offeror’s proposal that the offer is valid until 30 Sep 2016.

L.1.4 In accordance with FAR 4.8 - Government Contract Files, the government will retain one (1) copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, the government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

L.1.5 The Contracting Officer (CO) will promptly notify the Offeror of any decision to exclude the Offeror’s proposal from the competitive range whereupon the Offeror may request 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 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. An Offeror desiring a debriefing must make its request in accordance with FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

L.1.6 Points of Contact

The Contracting Officer, Ms. Lisa K. Brown, is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns to lisa.brown.19@us.af.mil with a courtesy copy to Ms. Shirley Castillo, Contract Specialist, at shirley.castillo@us.af.mil.

L.1.7 Discrepancies, Errors, Omissions and Questions If an Offeror believes the requirements in these instructions lack clarity or contain an error, omission, discrepancy, or are unsound, the Offeror shall immediately contact the CO in writing with supporting rationale. Address all questions or concerns to the points of contact (POC) listed above. Offerors shall submit all questions and requests for clarifications no later than 13 Apr 16 at 4:00PM. The decision whether to respond to questions and requests for clarifications made after 13 Apr 16 shall be at the sole discretion of the CO. Government responses will be posted on https://www.fbo.gov for access by all Offerors.

L.1.8 Amendment of Solicitation Prior to Proposal Closing

The government reserves the right to revise and amend the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such revisions or amendments will be communicated by amendment(s) to this RFP. If such amendments require material changes in quantities or prices, the proposal closing date may be extended to enable Offerors to revise proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal closing date and time.

Amendments will be posted to https://www.fbo.gov with the solicitation documents without notice. Offerors are mailto:ashley.cucchiarelli.2@us.af.mil responsible for accessing all amendments prior to proposal submission at https://www.fbo.gov.

L.1.9 Technical Reference Library

The ASSC Technical Reference Library will be available electronically with the solicitation at https://www.fbo.gov.

All information contained in the library is past data and is provided for informational purposes to aid in proposal preparation. Forms and publications referenced in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) will be available upon request by contacting Antony Smith, 30 SW/PM, at (805) 606-2157 or Keith Blades at (805) 606-9558. Any questions pertaining to the library may be submitted via e-mail to Ms. Shirley Castillo, Contract Specialist, at shirley.castillo@us.af.mil with a courtesy copy to Ms. Lisa Brown, Contracting Officer, at lisa.brown.19@us.af.mil.

L.2 PRE-AWARD SURVEY

L.2.1 If the information on hand or readily available to the CO is not sufficient to make a determination of responsibility in accordance with FAR 9.1, the Offeror may be required to participate in a pre-award survey for the purpose of determining the financial and technical ability to perform. The pre-award survey is conducted with the assistance of the Offeror’s cognizant government contract administration office to determine its eligibility and ability to perform. Refusal to participate in a pre-award survey and provide all requested information may be cause for rejection of the offer. If the Offeror is aware of some circumstances in its performance record or current ability to perform which may result in a negative report, the Offeror should provide any information on mitigating circumstances or corrective action planned or taken.

L.2.2 The pre-award survey may include performance of a formal financial capability risk assessment or audit by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or other personnel assigned by the CO to perform the task. This effort would be performed in accordance with DFARS 232.072-1 and the information required for audit would include, but not be limited to, that identified in DFARS 232.072-2. The Offeror agrees to provide the financial information for such financial capability effort in a timely manner. Failure to provide the requested data could cause the Offeror to be determined financially irresponsible as discussed in FAR 9.103.

L.3 PROPOSAL PREPARATION

L.3.1 Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. 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 to support performance and price/cost in a complete, orderly, and specific detailed manner will enable the government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation. To facilitate review and evaluation for this source selection, the government proposes to transmit data via commercial systems (i.e. encrypted e-mail, UPS, FedEx, etc.).

Distributed material will be identified as source selection sensitive and distribution strictly limited to appropriate personnel. Offerors’ responses shall consist of three (3) separate volumes; Volume I – Price/Cost, Volume II – Technical Capability and Volume III – Contract Documentation.

L.3.2 Table A – Proposal Organization. The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the Offeror's proposal for this solicitation. Proposals shall be submitted to the government in separate volumes as set forth below.

Table A – Proposal Organization

Volume

Volume Title Total Number of

Copies Page Limit

Electronic Copies

Due Date

I Price/Cost 4 No limit 2* 29 Apr 16

II

Technical Capability 3 75** 1 29 Apr 16

III

Contract

Documentation 3 No limit 1 29 Apr 16 http://www.fbo.gov/ https://www.fbo.gov/ mailto:shirley.castillo@us.af.mil

*Price/Cost Volume data is to be submitted in Microsoft Excel format with all formulas included so the calculations can be verified. One ( 1 ) protected version and one (1) version that can be manipulated by the government shall be provided.

** Page limit does not include any position descriptions, glossary of abbreviations/acronyms, Quality Control Plan or Mission Essential Plan.

L.3.3 Any proposal which fails to conform to the requirements or specifications in the solicitation may be considered ineligible for award. Proposals should be complete, clear, and not require additional explanation of information. The government may make a final determination as to whether a proposal is acceptable or unacceptable based solely on the proposal as presented and submitted.

L.4 VOLUME I – PRICE/COST (FACTOR 1)

L.4.1 In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a) data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support a determination of cost/price reasonableness. Data shall be provided in accordance with 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 cost or pricing data.

L.4.2 Affordability. The government’s budget for ASSC is $6.1M, excluding $887,320.00 for annual reimbursable material costs, for each fiscal year (FY). The government’s budget for the 6-month extension is $4M, excluding the $443,660.00 reimbursable materials costs. Offerors’ Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for each FY must be under the annual budget amount to be eligible for award. The 6-month extension must be under $4M to be eligible for award.

The government will identify estimated dollars for the cost associated with the reimbursable material contract line item numbers (CLINs). The government estimated dollars are not evaluated as a part of the TEP.

L.4.3 The price proposal shall be based on Offeror’s technical capability and approach to meeting the government’s PWS requirements. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to demonstrate price reasonableness.

L.4.4 Volume I – Price/Cost Organization. Submit (2) hard copies and two (2) electronic copies; one (1) protected electronic copy and one (1) electronic copy that can be manipulated by government. There is no page limit.

L.4.4.1 Volume I – Price/Cost shall consist of the following sections:

Section 1 – Introduction Section 2 – Estimating Techniques/Methods Section 3 – Price/Cost Section 4 – Other Information

L.4.4.1.2 Detailed Instructions for the Price /Cost Volume

L.4.4.1.2.1 Section 1 – Introduction

L.4.4.1.2.2 Provide a table of contents and overview of all data accompanying or identified in the Price/Cost Volume.

L.4.4.1.2.3 The Introduction shall include a cover sheet that contains the information listed in FAR 15.408, Table 15-2, General Instructions, Section A, paragraphs (1) - (11); however, exclude paragraph (9). Additionally, the cover sheet shall contain the name, address and telephone number of the Defense Contract Administration Office and DCAA office that is responsible for the Offeror’s audit review including whether the DCAA office approved the Offeror’s estimating system. If an agreement was reached with government representatives on use of forward pricing rates/factors, identify the agreement, include a copy, and describe its nature.

L.4.4.1.2.4 The Introduction will describe the Offeror’s proposed team structure including information related to joint venture partners and major subcontractors. A major subcontractor is defined as those performing more than ten percent (10%) of the effort, on a total cost basis. Define each team member’s role and clearly identify which CLINs, or portions thereof, are anticipated to be subcontracted to each team member. Identify the planned contract type for each subcontractor.

L.4.4.1.3 Section 2 – Estimating Techniques/Methods and Assumptions

L.4.4.1.3.1 Provide a summary description of the Offeror’s standard estimating system or methods including whether the cognizant DCAA office has approved the Offeror’s estimating system.

L.4.4.1.3.2 Provide any known/cited current estimating system deficiencies and how those deficiencies are mitigated. Describe separately the estimation of each major cost element (e.g., labor, overhead, other direct costs, general and administrative, etc.) and identify any deviations from the established estimating procedures in this proposal.

L.4.4.1.4 Section 3 – Price/Cost

L.4.4.1.4.1 Provide a schedule for Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) CLINs and a schedule for Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) CLINs for the basic and all option years as described in paragraphs L.4.4.1.4.2 and L.4.4.1.4.3 below.

L.4.4.1.4.2 Price/Cost data is required to be submitted for CPFF CLINs for Work Requests only. CPFF CLINs for Work Requests are 1004, 1007, 2004, 2007, 3004, 3007, 4004, 4007, 5004, 5007, 6004 and 6007. Provide a schedule of fully burdened hourly rates that includes direct hourly labor rates for each job code, indirect expense rates (e.g. fringe benefits, overheads, G&A) and CPFF fee for the CPFF CLINs for the basic and all option years.

These rates, if acceptable to the Contracting Officer, shall be considered to be a Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA) and will be incorporated into the resultant contract. See Table 1 – CPFF Rate Breakdown below for the suggested format for the offeror’s proposed FPRA submittal for CPFF CLINs for Work Requests.

TABLE 1 - CPFF Rate Breakdown for FPRA Submittal

Labor Category

Unburdened Rate

Overhead Percentage

G&A Percentage

Burdened Rate without Fee

Fee Percentage*

Fully Burdened Rate

*The maximum fee shall not exceed 6%

L.4.4.1.4.3 Offerors shall submit total proposed prices for all FFP CLINS for all basic and option years. Table 2 - Summary of Total Proposed Prices for FFP CLINs below shows the recommended format for summarizing the offeror’s total proposed prices for all FFP CLINs. The government has included estimated costs for the Reimbursable CLINs. No fee is included in the reimbursable CLINs.

TABLE 2 - Summary of Total Proposed Price for FFP CLINs

DESCRIPTION Phase-In (Basic)

OPT 1 OPT 2 OPT 3 OPT 4 OPT 5 Pre-Priced Extension (6 mths)

TOTAL

0001 - Phase-In

(FFP)

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

X001 - 30 SW

Launch Support

(FFP)

X002 - 30 SW

TA/AGE (FFP)

X003 - 30 SW

Reimbursable Materials (COST - Govt Furnished CLIN amount)

$787,320 $787,320 $787,320 $787,320 $787,320 $393,660

X004 - 30 SW

Work Requests

(CPFF)

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

X005 - 45 SW

TA/AGE (FFP)

X006 - 45 SW

Reimbursable Materials (COST - Govt Furnished CLIN amount)

$100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $50,000

X007 - 45 SW

Work Requests

(CPFF)

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

TOTAL all CLINs

L.4.4.1.4.4 Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of a proposal. 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 reasonableness The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices/costs rests with the Offeror.

L.4.4.1.5 Section 4 – Other Information

L.4.4.1.5.1 Proposals for all major first tier subcontracting/teaming shall be submitted within the prime contractor’s proposal. Major subcontractors are those whose cost equals ten percent (10%) or more of total cost. Nonprime cost proposals should be submitted through the prime to the CO. If the subcontractor/teaming partner considers its information proprietary, then it may be submitted directly to the CO by the same date and time the prime contractor’s proposal is due. The prime contractor’s proposal shall uniquely identify major subcontractor/teaming partner labor hours and total burdened costs. The prime contractor is responsible for the consistency of the cost data between the prime contractor’s submission and the subcontractor/teaming partner submission.

L.4.4.1.5.2 If there will be subcontracting/teaming, provide an analysis to determine the price reasonableness of the subcontractor/teaming partner’s proposal. Include the subcontractors/teaming partner’s methodology to estimate costs and results of the prime contractor’s reviews and evaluations of those proposals. Explain how the subcontractor/teaming effort relates to the overall effort. Any price adjustment to the subcontractor/teaming partner proposed prices that are included in the prime contractor’s proposal submission, including discounting or expected decreases to be achieved in negotiations, shall be fully identified and explained. Offerors are required to provide the results of the price or cost analysis of subcontractor proposal as required in FAR 15.404-3(b).

L.4.4.1.5.3 Accounting System Information. The government does not anticipate requesting accounting system reviews before contract award. Furthermore, the government cannot approve a cost-type subcontract to a proposed subcontractor that does not have an approved accounting system. Indicate whether each subcontractor’s accounting system has been audited and determined acceptable, audited and determined not acceptable, or never audited unless the planned subcontract type is firm-fixed price. Identify the government agency that audited the accounting system and provide evidence if determined acceptable. Evidence shall be in the form of the most recent applicable government agency correspondence. If the Offeror's accounting system has been audited and not accepted, provide details such as date of audit, deficiencies identified, corrective steps taken since disapproval, and reasons why approval of the accounting system is now assured. If the Offeror's accounting system has never been audited, the Offeror must explain its understanding of the characteristics of an acceptable accounting system.

L.4.4.1.5.4 Any contractor (or member of contractor team and/or subcontractor) having a conflict of interest as defined under FAR Part 9.5 must identify the conflict as soon as it is known and provide a recommended mitigation plan.

L.5 VOLUME II – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY (FACTOR 2). Limited to no more than seventy-five (75) pages exclusive of the Quality Control Plan and Mission Essential Plan. Offeror’s must submit two (2) hard copies and one

(1) electronic copy.

L.5.1 Technical Capability shall consist of the following sections.

Subfactor 1: Program Management Approach

• Organization and Staff

• Quality Control Plan

Subfactor 2: Launch Support Approach

• Unconventional Fuels

• Protective Equipment Maintenance Operations

• Systems and Safety Engineering

Subfactor 3:Transient Aircraft/Aerospace Ground Equipment Approach

L.5.2 General Instructions

Using the instructions outlined below, provide the actual methodology that would be used to address the criteria listed in the technical capability subfactors. The technical proposal shall address each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail to describe the Offeror’s proposed approach to performing the requirements set forth in the PWS, and Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs), and provide the references.

L.5.3 Subfactor 1 – Program Management Approach.

L.5.3.1 Organization and Staff

a. Present an effective and efficient organizational and staffing approach of all required departments and disciplines including any subcontracting arrangements, if necessary, to effectively and efficiently manage contract cost, schedule, and performance for unconventional fuels, Transient Alert /Aerospace Ground Equipment services, Protective Equipment Maintenance and Operations, fleet management, quality assurance/control, integrated logistics support, safety and environmental management.

L.5.3.2 Quality Control Plan

a. Present a Quality Control Plan that demonstrates the processes and procedures which establishes, documents, implements and maintains a quality management system that, at a minimum, adheres to the current requirements of ISO 9001:2008, Quality Management Systems - Requirements, or an equivalent standard.

L.5.4 Subfactor 2 – Launch Support Approach. Describe the approach to include processes and procedures toward accomplishing the disciplines below.

L.5.4.1 Unconventional Fuels

a. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures for performing the receipt, storage, inventory, monitoring, transfer, sample, and dispensing of hypergols maintained in bulk tanks, cylinders and drums.

b. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures for performing maintenance on propellant storage and dispensing systems, i.e., RPSE, transporters, high-pressure recharge units, high-pressure gas trailers and high-pressure gas systems and vessels, and personal protective equipment.

c. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures for performing and managing pneumatic and/or hydrostatic testing of pressure vessels that are part of bulk storage tanks, tube bank trailers, hypergol trailers, 30 SW and Defense Logistics Agency Aerospace Energy owned 4BW cylinder shipping containers in accordance with Department of Transportation and Air Force Occupational Safety and Health requirements.

L.5.4.2 Protective Equipment Maintenance Operations

a. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures for providing valet operations support for hardware integrity including transportation of personal protective equipment to the designated work site.

b. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures to perform annual respirator training and quantitative fit testing.

c. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures to respond to real world/time sensitive events.

d. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures to meet the emergency staffing requirements of the Hypergolic Emergency Response Team.

e. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures to provide personal protective equipment services.

L.5.4.3 Systems and Safety Engineering

a. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures to provide engineering support.

b. Discuss Offeror’s approach to include processes and procedures to establish and manage drafting capability to support engineering requirements to include preparation of the necessary engineering documentation for the proposed system modifications for the physical and operational enhancement of GFP/GFE systems and support equipment.

L.5.5 Subfactor 3 – Transient Aircraft/Aerospace Ground Equipment Approach

a. Provide a maximum of three (3) contract(s) and point(s) of contact that validates a minimum of two (2) years experience providing Transient Aircraft/Aerospace Ground Equipment service support on a military installation.

L.6 VOLUME III – CONTRACT DOCUMENTATON

Submit an original plus two (2) copies and one (1) electronic copy.

L.6.1 Proposal Organization

L.6.1.1 Proposal Documents shall be submitted in accordance with Proposal Preparation Instructions, so as to arrive no later than 4:00 PM, Pacific Daylight Time (PDT), as shown in block 9 of the SF 33. The schedule is not negotiable. A proposal cover letter should name a single point of contact within the organization for the proposal.

Proposal Documents must contain the following:

1. Table of Contents

2. Section A, Standard Form 33

3. Model contract (Sections B-K). All Fill-ins must be completed and signed as applicable, including Priced CDRLs

4. Offeror's statement accepting the terms of the solicitation

5. Acknowledgment of all amendments issued

6. Statement of the period of which the proposal is valid (XXX 2016)

7. The name, address and telephone number of the cognizant DCAA Office.

8. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Plan, if applicable

9. Relationship and copies of any teaming or joint venture agreements

L.6.2 Proposal Submission

Submit your proposal to the following address:

30 CONS/LGCZG

ATTN: Shirley Castillo, Contract Specialist Bldg 8500, Rm 150 1515 Iceland Avenue Vandenberg AFB CA 93437-5212

L.6.2.1 Documents submitted in response to this RFP must be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

1. Requirements of the RFP (CLINs and PWS) and government standards and regulations pertaining to the PWS.

2. Evaluation Factors for Award in Section M of this RFP.

3. Format for proposal Volumes I, II III shall be as follows:

(i) Pages exceeding the page limitation set forth in this section L will not be read or evaluated and will be removed from the proposal.

(ii) The proposals will be 8 1/2” x 11” paper except for fold-outs used for charts, tables, or diagrams, which may not exceed 11” x 17”.

(iii) A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information.

(iv) Font size shall be Times New Roman 12 point proportionally spaced font with a minimum of 1 inch margins not inclusive of headers/footers with the exception of charts, tables or diagrams.. Offerors shall insert page numbers in the footer.

(v) Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required.

(vi) No models or mockups will be accepted.

(vii) Volume I to be submitted in Microsoft Excel format to verify calculations.

(viii) Volumes II and III to be submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format.

L.6.2.2 Paragraphs and subparagraphs of the proposal should reference the paragraphs of the PWS, when applicable.

L.6.2.3 Insert prices in Section B for each CLIN, including all option periods. The extended amount must equal the whole dollar unit price multiplied by the number of units.

L.6.2.4 For Sections C through I, the Offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in Sections I through K. Section K shall be returned in its entirety.

L.6.2.5 All information relating to cost or pricing data shall be included exclusively in Volume I. No program cost data or cross-reference to the price proposal will be included in any other volume.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.217-5 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS (JUL 1990)

Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the government's best interests, the government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

(End of provision)

M.1 BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

a. This is a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) acquisition and will be conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3 - Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) and the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force (AF) FAR Site http://farsite.hill.af.mil.

A contract will be awarded to the Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR Part 9.1, as supplemented, and 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 from the selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. The government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award.

The evaluation process to be used is as follows:

Step 1: Perform price evaluations on all responsive proposals and rank them from lowest to highest;

Step 2: Conduct technical evaluations beginning with the lowest priced responsive proposal. If the lowest priced responsive proposal is determined to be technically unacceptable, then the next lowest priced responsive proposal will be evaluated. Technical evaluations will continue until the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal is identified. The government, at its discretion, may continue technical evaluations until the contracting officer determines that a sufficient number of technically acceptable proposals have been identified to permit determination of price fair and reasonable based on adequate price competition. The government reserves the right to award without discussions. The government reserves the right to perform both price and technical evaluations on non-responsive offerors to determine if it is in its interest to open discussions. Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award.

b. The government intends to award a contract without discussions with Offerors except for clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a). However, if during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the government to hold discussions, Offeror’s responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the Offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as acceptable at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the FPR are subject to evaluation and may introduce risk that the Offeror’s proposal be determined unacceptable and ineligible for award.

c. Contract award will be made on the basis of the lowest total evaluated price of proposals meeting the acceptability standards for Factor 2 - Technical Capability based upon an assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below. Any proposal with one (1) or more “unacceptable” technical rating for any subfactor within Factor 2 - Technical Capability will be ineligible for award. While the government Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature is subjective. Therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

M.1.1 Mandatory Requirement

Failure to comply with all terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award.

M.1.2 Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The government intends to award a single contract as a result of this solicitation. However, the government reserves the right to not award a contract.

M.1.3 Government Furnished Property

All Government Furnished Property (GFP) presently available for ASSC is listed in Attachment 4, ASSC Government Furnished Property. In accordance with FAR 45.201(c) and FAR 45.202 (a), the government will eliminate any competitive advantage resulting from an Offeror’s proposed use of any GFP that is in addition to the GFP listed in Attachment 4, ASSC Government Furnished Property.

M.2 VOLUME I - PRICE/COST (FACTOR 1)

M.2.1 Price Evaluation. The total evaluated price (TEP) will be calculated as described in paragraph M.2.6 below. The price evaluation will document the reasonableness, affordability and balance of the Offeror’s TEP.

The performance period of the contract includes a thirty (30)-day phase-in period, and five (5) one (1)-year options. In addition, the government may further extend the performance period for up to six (6) months under FAR 52.217-8. The extension will be in accordance with prevailing rates within the contract at the time of the extension. Proposals determined not to be reasonable, affordable or balanced will result in the Offeror being deemed not eligible for award.

M.2.2 Price 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. See FAR 31.201-3 (a). The techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404-1(b) will be the primary means of assessing proposal reasonableness. Furthermore, the evaluation techniques described under FAR 15.404-1(c), as determined appropriate, may also be performed in further determining the reasonableness of the proposal. The government will identify estimated cost associated with the reimbursable material CLINs. The government estimated costs are not evaluated as a part of the TEP.

M.2.3 Affordability. The affordability assessment will consider the proposed prices as compared to the annual total projected budget for this program. The government’s budget for ASSC is $6.1M which excludes $887,320 annual reimbursable material costs for each FY. The government’s budget for the 6-month extension is $4M, excluding the $443,660.00 reimbursable materials costs. The government will identify estimated cost for the cost associated with the reimbursable material CLINs. The government estimated costs are not evaluated as a part of the TEP. Offerors’ TEP for each FY must be under the annual budget amount to be eligible for award. The 6-month extension price must be under $4M to be eligible for award. If the Offeror’s proposed prices exceed the available budget in any given year, the government will determine the proposal to be unaffordable and will be ineligible for contract award.

M.2.4 Unbalanced Pricing. Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing. In accordance with FAR 15.401-1(g) unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. The government shall analyze price to determine whether it is unbalanced with the respect to separately priced line items. Offers determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the CO determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the government.

M.2.5 Cost Realism. The government will evaluate the cost realism of each offerors’proposed rates for CPFF CLINs for Work Requests only. This will include an evaluation of the extent to which proposed rates are sufficient for the work to be performed, reflective of a clear understanding of the requirements and consistent with the unique methods of performance described in the Offeror’s technical proposal. CPFF CLINs for Work Requests will also be evaluated for reasonableness.

M.2.6 Total Evaluated Price will be calculated as follows:

a. Calculate the totals for all FFP CLINs 0001, 1001, 1002, 1005, 2001, 2002, 2005, 3001, 3002, 3005, 4001, 4002, 4005, 5001, 5002, 5005, 6001, 6002 and 6005 by adding the total price of all CLINs. The sums of the FFP CLINs shall constitute the total evaluated price.

b. Offerors shall use the government provided amounts for cost reimbursable material CLINs 1003, 1006, 2003, 2006, 3003, 3006, 4003, 4006, 5003, 5006, 6003 and 6006. These CLINs will not be included in the total evaluated price.

c. The CPFF CLINs for Work Requests 1004, 1007, 2004, 2007, 3004, 3007, 4004, 4007, 5004, 5007, 6004 and 6007 are reserved until after award and will not be included in the total evaluated price. However, Work Requests workload estimates are projected at $1.3M - $2M per fiscal year.

M.3 VOLUME II - TECHNICAL CAPABILITY (FACTOR 2)

M.3.1 Evaluation of Subfactors

The following evaluation subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal. The government will evaluate proposals for acceptability, but will not rank the proposals by the non-price factors or subfactors.

Technical Capability Subfactors as listed in Section L.5.1 are as follows:

Subfactor 1: Program Management Approach

• Organization and Staff

• Quality Control Plan

Subfactor 2: Launch Support Approach

• Unconventional Fuels

• Protective Equipment Maintenance Operations

• Systems and Safety Engineering

Subfactor 3:Transient Aircraft/Aerospace Ground Equipment Approach

M.3.1.1 Technical Rating for Subfactors

Each Offeror’s technical proposal shall be evaluated, based on the subfactors, on a pass/fail basis by assigning a rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable as described in the Technical Rating Table below. Technical risk will be a part of the criteria considered in the technical acceptability decision. For the purposes of this evaluation, technical risk is defined as the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach for the requirements of this solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The Source Selection Team’s identification of any weaknesses and/or significant weaknesses will be considered in evaluating risk. Weakness is defined as a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Significant weakness is defined as a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. The technical approach must be evaluated as “low” risk in order to be determined technically acceptable. Low risk is defined as having little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties. Offers may be determined unacceptable, even though the minimum requirements are met, if the proposed approach poses too great a risk. One technical rating shall be assigned to each technical subfactor. In order to be considered for award each subfactor must be rated technically acceptable. One subfactor rated technically unacceptable will result in an unacceptable Technical Capability proposal and will render the entire proposal unacceptable and, therefore, unawardable.

Offeror’s are reminded that technical evaluations are subjective and are determined at the discretion of the government.

Technical Rating Table Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

M.3.2 Technical Capability Subfactors

M.3.2.1 Subfactor 1 – Program Management Approach

The standard of acceptability for this subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal provides a sound technical approach which will be specifically evaluated on the following:

a. An organizational and staffing approach which demonstrates effective and efficient management of all required departments and disciplines including any subcontracting arrangements, if necessary, in accordance with PWS §3.1 which requires the contractor to establish and maintain an organization to effectively and efficiently manage contract cost, schedule, and performance of the Aerospace Support Services program. The contractor shall demonstrate an effective and efficient management approach for unconventional fuels, Transient Alert /Aerospace Ground Equipment services, Protective Equipment Maintenance and Operations, fleet management, quality assurance/control, integrated logistics support, safety and environmental management.

b. A Quality Control Plan that demonstrates the processes and procedures to implement and maintain the quality management system in accordance with PWS §4.1.1 which requires the contractor to establish, document, implement and maintain a quality management system that, at a minimum, adheres to the current requirements of ISO 9001:2008, Quality Management Systems - Requirements, or an equivalent standard.

M.3.2.2 Subfactor 2 – Launch Support Approach

M.3.2.2.1 Unconventional Fuels

M.3.2.2.1.1 The standard of acceptability for this subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal provides a sound technical approach which will be specifically evaluated on the following:

a. Demonstrates processes and procedures for performing the receipt, storage, inventory, monitoring, transfer, sample, and dispensing of hypergols maintained in bulk tanks, cylinders and drums. PWS §3.2.1.8.1.

b. Demonstrates processes and procedures for performing maintenance on propellant storage and dispensing systems, i.e., RPSE, transporters, high-pressure recharge units, high-pressure gas trailers and high-pressure gas systems and vessels, and personal protective equipment. PWS §3.2.1.8.4.

c. Demonstrates processes and procedures for performing and managing pneumatic and/or hydrostatic testing of pressure vessels that are part of bulk storage tanks, tube bank trailers, hypergol trailers, 30 SW and Defense Logistics Agency Aerospace Energy owned 4BW cylinder shipping containers in accordance with Department of Transportation and Air Force Occupational Safety and Health requirements. PWS §3.2.1.8.5.

M.3.2.2.2 Protective Equipment Maintenance Operations

The standard of acceptability for this subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal provides a sound technical approach which will be specifically evaluated on the following:

a. Demonstrates processes and procedures for providing valet operations support for hardware integrity including transportation of personal protective equipment to the designated work site. PWS §3.2.2.1.

b. Demonstrates processes and procedures required to perform annual respirator training and quantitative fit testing. PWS §3.2.2.2.

c. Demonstrates processes and procedures to respond to real world/time sensitive events. PWS §3.2.4.3.

d. Demonstrates processes and procedures to meet the emergency staffing requirements of the Hypergolic

Emergency Response Team. PWS §3.2.4.4.

e. Demonstrates processes and procedures to provide personal protective equipment services. PWS §3.2.2.7.

M.3.2.2.3 Systems and Safety Engineering

The standard of acceptability for this subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal provides a sound technical approach in the areas below:

a. Demonstrates processes and procedures to provide engineering support. PWS §3.2.5.4.

b. Demonstrates processes and procedures to establish and manage drafting capability to support engineering requirements to include preparation of the necessary engineering documentation for the proposed system modifications for the physical and operational enhancement of GFP/GFE systems and support equipment. PWS §3.2.5.2.

M.3.2.3 Subfactor 3 – Transient Aircraft/Aerospace Ground Equipment Approach

The standard of acceptability for this subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal provides a maximum of three (3) contract(s) and point(s) of contact that validates a minimum of two (2) year’s experience providing Transient Aircraft/Aerospace Ground Equipment service support on a military installation.

M.4 CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

Proposal documentation will be evaluated for compliance and completeness with the requirements of the Request for Proposal and Section L.