Attch 8 Section L - draft.docx

FA4610-27-R-0001

Attachment 8 Section L – Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

The Offeror’s proposal shall include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions. In developing the proposal, the Offeror shall ensure that its proposed offer complies with all the requirements contained in the Request for Proposal (RFP). Failure to adhere to the instructions provided in this RFP may result in a determination that the proposal is non-compliant and unawardable. Proposals shall be unclassified and no classified information will be accepted in response to this solicitation.

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and 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, provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. Elaborate brochures, corporate background and promotional/marketing-type information, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired. All claimed technical, management, performance, and schedule capabilities to meet Government requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government. For the purpose of this solicitation, the Offeror shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of its facilities, capabilities, and experience. The Government will not assume the Offeror will do anything that is not expressly stated in its proposal.

The proposal acceptance period is specified in the Model Contract/Solicitation, SF33, Block 9. The proposal shall be valid for a period no less than 365 days from the required submission date. IAW FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. The Government will eliminate all extra copies of unsuccessful proposals. Under Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS) (15 CFR 700) this service contract is rated DO-C9.

The Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) and the revised Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (R-DFARS) apply in full to this acquisition. To reflect these mandatory updates, all citations and guidance pertaining to the new Federal Acquisition Regulation are referenced throughout this solicitation as "RFO," and all updates pertaining to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement are referenced as "R-DFARS.

General Information Point of Contact The Offeror shall address any questions or concerns to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) Katherine Williams at katherine.williams.9@spaceforce.mil and shall courtesy copy the Contract Specialist, Sabrina Swain, at sabrina.swain.1@spaceforce.mil.

Exchanges of source selection information between the Government and Offerors will be controlled by the PCO. Source selection information may be transmitted via encrypted email.

Discrepancies If an Offeror believes that the requirements in this RFP contain an error or omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the PCO to consider as related to the omission or error. Government responses will be posted to SAM.gov for access by all Offerors.

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 postponed to enable offerors to revise their proposals. Amendments will be posted at SAM.gov and the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module with the solicitation documents without notice. Offerors are responsible for accessing all amendments prior to proposal submission.

Consideration of Alternate Proposals Alternate proposals will not be considered.

Electronic Reference Documents A Bidders’ Library has been established in SAM.gov containing access instructions/documents to assist in the preparation of proposals. All other referenced documents for this solicitation will be made available on SAM.gov and the PIEE (https://piee.eb.mil) Solicitation Module. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for realtime email notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

Notification to Offerors Funds are not presently available for this effort. IAW RFO 52.232-18 no award will be made under this solicitation until funds are available.

The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an Offeror for any costs.

Debriefings The Contracting Officer will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range or upon award, in accordance with RFO 15.206-2 and 15.301. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a pre-award debriefing, or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing. However, offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to only one debriefing. Furthermore, in accordance with R-DFARS 215.301-170, offerors are entitled to enhanced debriefing disclosures, including redacted copies of the source selection decision document where applicable. Pursuant to R-DFARS 215.301-270, upon receipt of a required debriefing, the Offeror will be provided the opportunity to submit additional written questions related to the debriefing within two (2) business days. The Government will provide a written response within five (5) business days after receipt of the questions. The debriefing will not be considered concluded until the agency delivers its written responses to the Offeror. Notification of these postaward debriefing rights is provided via R-DFARS Provision 252.215-7996.

Clarifications and Negotiations The Government may conduct clarifications, which are limited exchanges utilized to resolve minor or clerical errors, or to clarify the relevance of an Offeror's past performance information, without allowing for a proposal revision. The Government reserves the right to award without negotiations. However, if it is in the Government’s best interest to hold negotiations (formerly discussions), then the Government may conduct them with offerors after establishing a competitive range of the most highly rated proposals based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria. The Offeror’s Final Proposal Revision shall capture any information provided in responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) that impact the Offeror’s proposal. The Government reserves the right to incorporate any aspects of the Offeror’s proposal considered a “strength” into the awarded contract.

Proposal Submission and Formatting Rules Proposal Delivery All proposals shall be delivered electronically using the PIEE Solicitation Module (https://piee.eb.mil). Proposals must be received no later than the date and time listed in block 9 of the SF 33. The maximum file size that can be uploaded into the PIEE Solicitation module is 1.9 GB. Offerors submitting proposals via the PIEE Solicitation Module should follow up via email to the PCO to confirm receipt. Offerors are responsible for confirming the Government received their respective proposal submission and subcontractor submissions prior to the proposal due date. NOTE: Proposal receipt after the due date and time shall be governed by the provisions of RFO 52.215-1(c)(3). All data files and electronic media delivered to the Government must be reviewed to ensure they are virus-free.

Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table 1 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. The Offeror shall use a common paragraph numbering and outline system for the volumes and appendices of the proposal. The Offeror shall submit proposals 100% electronically via the PIEE Solicitation Module at https://piee.eb.mil/. No hard copies, CD-ROMs, or facsimile submissions will be accepted.

Any proposal, which fails to conform to the requirements or specifications in the solicitation, may be considered ineligible for award. Proposals should be complete and 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.

Table 1 – Proposal Organization

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. Page limitations do not apply to title pages, tables of contents, list of figures, list of abbreviations, glossaries, cross-reference matrix or indexes, which should be provided in each volume. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (EN). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors.

Page Size and Format A page is defined as each face of a sheet containing information. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including display pages as specified below. Pages shall be single-spaced. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be 12-point Arial font with no font kerning. Margins shall be 1 inch on the top and bottom and ¾ inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall also apply to responses of ENs. The Technical Capability/Risk volume shall be submitted as a single file except for Volume 2 Appendix T1. Volume 2 Appendix T1 shall be submitted as a MS Excel file with all formulas, formatting, and filtering unlocked.

Legible tables, Excel data files, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. If necessary, display pages may be used that exceed the 8.5 x 11-inch page size, but shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Any page display page larger than 8.5 x 11 shall count as two pages. Display pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics, not for pages of text.

Text inside graphics, matrices, spreadsheets, focus boxes, and tables shall use single-line spacing and shall be 10-point Arial font. Otherwise, text may be used sparingly to describe the depicted pictures or graphics and shall use single-line spacing and be no smaller than 8-point Arial font.

All page format restrictions shall apply to responses to any EN responses.

All cost or pricing data shall be addressed ONLY in the Cost/Price Proposal and Administrative Documents Volumes. Cost trade-off information, work-hour estimates, and material kinds and quantities may be used in other volumes only as appropriate for presenting rationale for alternatives or design and trade-off decisions.

VOLUME 2 – FACTOR 1 INTRODUCTION

Master Table of Contents and Cross Reference Matrix The Offeror shall provide a master table of contents for the entire proposal and shall clearly and concisely indicate the structure of the proposal. The Cross Reference Matrix shall ensure traceability throughout the RFP sections and proposal volumes and attachments and contain, at a minimum, the items shown in Table 1: Proposal Organization. The format of this discussion is at the discretion of the Offeror; however, active links to proposal material from the matrix are encouraged. The Offeror shall utilize the format shown in Table 2, below, to construct and submit this matrix.

Table 2 - Sample Cross Reference Matrix

VOLUME 2 – FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL

General Instructions The technical proposal Volume 2 shall provide convincing rationale to demonstrate how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements in the subfactors. For each subfactor, the Offeror shall identify risks, if any, associated with the proposed approach and actions the Offeror will take to mitigate the identified risks. If no risks/mitigations are identified in the Offeror’s proposal, it indicates the Offeror does not consider there to be any risk associated with their proposed approach. Using the instructions outlined below, provide the actual methodology that would be used to address the criteria of these subfactors, the contractors’ organization elements that will perform the required tasks, the resources required, and what, if any, input or information is required from the Government or other sources. The indicated information, at a minimum, shall be provided for the following subfactors set forth below. Throughout this volume, provide references to the Performance Work Statement (PWS), Contractor Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS), Bases of Estimate (BOEs), and Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs). Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of their capabilities, work processes, facilities, and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s technical proposal.

Subfactor 1: Program Management Discuss Offeror’s approach to Program Management to meet FRAME requirements as listed in the PWS. The proposed approach shall specifically address the following:

Describe your organizational structure for management of contract performance from the Offeror’s Program Director, or equivalent senior official with overall authority and accountability for contract performance, down to frontline supervisors and explain how authority, responsibility, accountability, communication, and decision-making will be assigned and exercised to execute the requirements of the PWS. Include an organizational chart showing the contractor’s organization from the Program Director, or equivalent, to the lowest supervisory level and depict all required departments, disciplines, and proposed staffing for those areas. On the organizational chart, clearly list the applicable PWS section(s) next to each position (or group of positions) so the Government can readily see which PWS requirements each depicted position supports. Every position shown on the organizational chart shall match the job titles, organization units, and FTE quantities proposed in Attachment L-1 (Basis of Estimate Workbook) and Attachment L-3 (Cost/Price Workbook). The discussion shall explain the roles and interfaces of key management and support functions, including as applicable program management, operations, maintenance, business/financial management, quality, property, and other functions necessary for contract performance. The Offeror shall explain how the proposed structure, staffing, and labor mix are supported by the BOE and aligned with the proposed technical approach.

Describe the Offeror’s management processes and internal controls that will be used to administer contract performance. At a minimum, address the processes the Offeror will use for program-level oversight internal and external stakeholder coordination; execution of contract actions within required timelines; providing status on contract execution, facility readiness and projects; accurate billing in support of contract performance. Describe the Offeror’s processes for sourcing, training and certifying staffing to response to changing requirements.

Provide a Phase-in Plan to cover all requirements in PWS Paragraph 8.1 and assume all performance responsibilities without disruption to mission operations. The plan shall include, at a minimum, a time-phased schedule of all transition activities, identification of key Contractor-Government interfaces, and descriptions of processes to on-board personnel, transition facilities, Government-furnished property, systems, data, documentation, access requirements, required plans, and other resources necessary for full contract performance. The Plan must describe a process to capture, track, and mitigate risks throughout the Phase-In period and ensure contractor readiness to assume all performance responsibilities.

Subfactor 2: Maintenance and Repair Discuss Offeror’s approach to Maintenance and Repair to meet FRAME requirements as listed in the PWS. The proposed approach shall specifically address the following:

The Offeror shall describe their strategy to implement and manage a data-driven Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) program in accordance with PWS Paragraph 4.5 and mitigate the risk of mission-impacting equipment failures. This discussion must outline the proposed methodology for conducting Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) and how those outputs directly determine the mix of reactive, preventive, and predictive maintenance (PdM) tasks. The Offeror must specify any PdM technologies would seek to deploy and explain how these will be integrated with the Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS). To proactively manage aging infrastructure and obsolescence risks, the Offeror must also detail their process for conducting continuous equipment life-cycle assessments, generating data-driven capital replacement recommendations, and preparing Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost estimates to support Government long-term capital planning.

The Offeror shall detail a proactive, comprehensive strategy to implement and manage the corrosion control program in accordance with PWS Paragraph 4.6. This narrative must explain the systematic process for conducting quarterly corrosion inspections and utilizing that data to develop the Corrosion Prevention and Control Plan (CDRL A026). The Offeror must specify the surface preparation and coating application standards (e.g., AMPP, SSPC) they will enforce to guarantee coating durability in a highly corrosive marine environment. Additionally, the Offeror must describe their approach to identifying and implementing best-value preservation measures that maximize the operational lifespan of structures within a highly-corrosive environment.

The Offeror shall describe their comprehensive approach to utilizing their proposed Work Order Management System processes and tools (including their Computerized Maintenance Management System) to execute workflow operations. This narrative must detail the internal processes and procedures for scheduling, tracking work status, labor hours and material costs, and closeout. The Offeror must explain how their system and processes will provide visibility for the Government and optimize resource utilization. Additionally, the narrative must address the Offeror's approach to interfacing with the Government system (NextGenIT). Finally, the Offeror must address cybersecurity protections and data integrity controls.

Describe the approaches, processes, tools, technologies, or other methods the Offeror would employ to mitigate the impacts of a significant increase in launch tempo (from the current approximate rate of 100 launches per year up to a projected rate of 300 launches per year) on the ability to perform maintenance and repair. These impacts include increased scheduling and coordination demands associated with launch support and reduced access windows for facilities and equipment located in or supporting the launch and safety exclusion areas. Do not propose specific staffing numbers, labor-hour estimates, or quantitative manpower projections; the Government is evaluating the soundness and innovativeness of the proposed mitigations only.

Subfactor 3: Pressure Vessels Discuss proposed approach to Pressure Vessels to meet FRAME requirements as listed in the PWS. The proposed approach shall specifically address the following:

The Offeror shall describe their approach to executing pressure vessel maintenance, testing, and certification in strict compliance with all applicable Department of the Air Force, Federal, and national industry standards, specifically including SSCMAN 91-710, the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC), and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code in accordance with PWS Paragraph 4.12. This discussion must detail the Offeror's internal processes for ensuring that its technicians and inspectors obtain and maintain all required technical certifications and knowledge associated with aging pressure vessel infrastructure.

The Offeror shall describe their comprehensive execution plan for the In-Service Inspection (ISI) program to monitor vessel integrity and sustain operational certifications. This narrative must detail how the Offeror will perform Non-Destructive Inspection (NDI) utilizing certified Level II (or equivalent) inspectors to analyze material degradation, track system thickness, and detect defect propagation. Additionally, the Offeror must explain how these inspection results and technical data will be compiled, analyzed, and managed to update the certification schedule and satisfy the delivery requirements of the Pressure Vessel Inspection and Certification Plan (CDRL A027).

Appendix T1 Basis of Estimate The Offeror shall provide a detailed Basis of Estimate (BOE) for all proposed staffing under CLINs X001 through X007 by completing and submitting Attachment L-1, Basis of Estimate Workbook. This workbook requires the Offeror to input the proposed Full Time Equivalent (FTE) labor, to the nearest tenth of an FTE, for all positions that direct charge any percentage of time to the contract under CLINs X001 through X007, including positions proposed by the Prime Offeror and all subcontractors. The workbook is structured to capture staffing data by CLIN for CLINs X001-X007.

Attachment L-1 is intended to support the evaluation of recurring staffing requirements for CLINs X001 through X007. Detailed staffing data are not required in Attachment L-1 for CLIN X008, CLIN X009, or CLIN X010. The Offeror shall provide pricing support for those CLINs in Attachment L-3, Cost/Price Workbook, in accordance with Section 5.

The Offeror must complete the designated section for each applicable CLIN, providing all required information, including but not limited to Location, Organizational Unit, Job Title, Certifications, Education and Experience, Cross-utilization, Full Time equivalents (FTE) to the nearest tenth and Labor Hours required to perform all associated PWS requirements during the base year of the contract. For PWS 8.1 the Phase-In BOE will correspond to the Period of Performance of CLIN 0098.

The Organization Unit name will correspond to the contractor’s organization chart included in Volume 2, Factor 1, Technical Capability, Subfactor 1, Program Management (refer to Section 3.2.1). The Job Title will correspond to the contractor’s job titles (exempt) and Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) titles (represented) identified in Volume 4 – Factor 3 – Cost/Price. The Offeror’s organizational staffing shall be consistent with the numbers proposed in Volume 4 Cost/Price.

The Offeror shall clearly identify any proposed cross-utilization of personnel among CLINs X001 through X007. To the extent known at the time of proposal submission, the Offeror shall also identify any anticipated cross-utilization between CLINs X001 through X007 and other CLINs. The Offeror shall demonstrate consistency between the proposed staffing approach, Attachment L-1, Basis of Estimate Workbook, and Attachment L-3, Cost/Price Workbook.

Offerors may include a narrative immediately following each table to assist the Government’s understanding of the offeror’s methodology for the quantity, type, and location of proposed staff to perform the requirements of the PWS and RFP attachments. This should include identification of any unique or complicating factors and related assumptions.

The Offeror shall document all proposed staffing changes for Ordering Years 2-9 within the designated section of Attachment L-1, Basis of Estimate Workbook. All changes shall be explained in the spreadsheet. The Offeror is only allowed to propose reductions resulting from efficiencies when the changes are within the offeror’s control. That is, a contractor-introduced efficiency does not require Government approval, changes in Government or range user operations, or a change in contract requirements. All proposed changes in staffing must be reflected in and traceable to a corresponding change in Volume 4 – Factor 3 – Cost/Price.

VOLUME 3 – FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE

General Instructions Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume with their proposal. Past performance information will be evaluated for the Offeror and any member of the Offeror’s team who performs a minimum of 5% of the proposed contract value. Citations submitted by team members not performing a minimum of 5% of the contract value will not be evaluated.

Consent/Client Letter Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime Offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. The Offeror shall submit a consent letter, Attachment L-2 (if applicable) executed by the subcontractor, teaming partner, joint venture, etc., whose contract data is provided for consideration, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the Offeror so the Offeror can respond to such information. Submit the Consent/Client Letters as an Appendix to Volume 3 Past Performance. The Consent/Client Letters will not count against the page count requirements.

Recent/Relevant Contracts For the purpose of this source selection, recent present/past performance is defined as contracts performed within three (3) years from the issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated. The Government will evaluate all recent performance information for the Offeror, Subcontractors, Primary Teaming Partners, or Joint Venture Partners to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts relate to requirements established in the FRAME PWS. For past performance on an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract, a single task order may count as a citation if the task order is both recent and relevant under the Section M criteria.

This relevancy portion of the evaluation will consider the Offeror’s performance as a prime contractor or as a subcontractor. For Offerors proposing as a joint venture and/or mentor-protégé joint venture, past performance reference citations for any joint venture member may be submitted as the capabilities and past performance of the joint venture. Offerors who submit past performance and experience information of a parent, sister, predecessor or other affiliated company must describe what involvement such company will have on the acquisition. The proposal should clearly indicate how the resources (its workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) of the affiliate company shall be provided or relied upon for contract performance such that the parent, sister, predecessor or affiliate will have meaningful involvement in contract performance. The Government will not consider citations for the Program Management subfactor from any company other than the prime Offeror unless the aforementioned in this paragraph applies.

Past Performance Reference Checks:

For each past performance citation submitted, the Offeror shall send Attachment L-5, Past Performance Questionnaire, to the customer point(s) of contact identified in Attachment L-6, Performance Information Form (PIF), Paragraph F. The Offeror shall request that each completed questionnaire be returned directly to the Government at the email address identified in Attachment L-5.

The Offeror shall send the questionnaire(s) no later no later than 10 business days before the proposal due date and is encouraged to follow up with its points of contact to facilitate timely responses. The Offeror shall not complete, modify, or submit completed questionnaires on behalf of its references.

The Government may independently send a Past Performance Questionnaire to any reference identified in the Offeror’s proposal, or to another source, when the Government determines that additional past performance information is needed. The Government is not required to contact every reference identified by the Offeror or obtain a completed questionnaire for each citation. If a reference does not respond, the Government may evaluate the Offeror’s past performance using the information otherwise available.

Joint Venture Past Performance:

In accordance with RFO 15.202(c)(3)(iv) and 13 CFR 125.8(e), when an Offeror submits a proposal as a Joint Venture (JV), including a mentor-protégé joint venture, and the JV entity itself does not have a formalized record of relevant past performance, the Government shall evaluate the past performance of the individual JV partners (or members of the joint venture alliance). Offerors proposing as a Joint Venture (including mentor-protégé JVs) that lack entity-level past performance must submit past performance citations for the individual partners that will perform the work under this contract. Each citation must clearly identify which specific JV partner performed the referenced contract. For mentor-protégé joint ventures, the Government shall consider the past performance of both the mentor and the protégé when evaluating the JV’s past performance confidence assessment.

Additional Information and Missing Past Performance:

The Government may conduct follow-up clarifications with any people identified on the citations. The Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance Volume and information obtained from other sources available to the Government in the development of the Performance Confidence Assessment rating.

If the Offeror, including the entities whose past performance is required or proposed for evaluation, does not have relevant past performance information to submit, the Offeror shall include a signed statement in the Past Performance Volume affirming that no relevant past performance information is available. Submission of this statement satisfies the requirement to submit a Past Performance Volume. An Offeror that fails to submit either: (1) the required past performance citations; or (2) a statement that no relevant past performance information is available, may be determined non-compliant and ineligible for award. In accordance with RFO 15.202(c)(1), an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom relevant past performance information is not available, will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably for past performance and will receive a Neutral Confidence rating.

Specific Volume Requirements The Past Performance Volume shall be organized in accordance with Table 3 below. Except as provided in paragraph 4.4 for an Offeror without relevant past performance information, the Offeror shall submit a minimum of one (1) and a maximum of three (3) past performance citations for each technical subfactor area: Program Management, Maintenance and Repair, and Pressure Vessels. Citations shall be submitted and evaluated in accordance with paragraphs 4.1 through 4.3. Table 3 outlines the required sections and content of the Past Performance Volume TABLE 3 – Past Performance Volume Organization

Identify the organizational responsibilities and PWS performance requirements to be performed by the prime and each subcontractor and how the experience from each cited contract is imparted to performance under FRAME.

Describe the prime contractor’s corporate structure to the extent necessary to understand the relationship between the prime Offeror and each past performance citation.

If proposing as a joint venture describe the composition of the joint venture, the role of each party of the joint venture for FRAME performance, whether the joint venture is single purpose (FRAME only) or multi-purpose (if multi-purpose, list other contracts currently held by the joint venture) and the relationship of each member of the joint venture to its parent corporate structure.

Citation 2

Citation 3

For each relevant citation submitted, the Offeror shall address the following with respect to its relevant past performance:

VOLUME 4 – FACTOR 3 COST/PRICE

General Instructions The Cost/Price Factor volume shall be based on the Offeror’s technical approach to meeting the Government’s PWS requirements and contain the information requested in the paragraphs below. The Offeror shall submit other-than-certified cost or pricing data (per RFO 15.403-1, 15.403-2 and 15.403-3[c]) for the Government’s evaluation. The proposal shall contain sufficient details for the Government’s evaluation of reasonableness, realism (specific to proposed rates for CPIF CLIN X002 and X003 and CPFF CLIN X009), and balanced pricing for the best value decision. Data beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your cost/price position.

Upon receipt of proposals, the Government will conduct an initial compliance and completeness review of the Cost/Price Volume. The purpose of this review is to determine if the Offeror has strictly complied with all Cost/Price Volume instructions, including but not limited to the use of the mandatory Cost/Price Workbook, the provision of traceable Excel formulas without hard-coded “plugs,” and the submission of all required raw data to support proposed rates. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory. The Government may seek clarifications to resolve minor or clerical errors in the Cost/Price Volume before making a final compliance determination. If, after any such clarifications, the Government determines that the Cost/Price Volume is incomplete, lacks necessary formula traceability, or fails to provide the required substantiating data, the proposal may be deemed non-compliant and unawardable. In such an event, the Government reserves the right to reject the proposal and eliminate the Offeror from the competition without conducting any further assessment of the proposal’s reasonableness, realism, or balanced pricing.

Offeror’s price proposal shall be based on their technical capability and approach to meeting the Government’s PWS requirements. Explain any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between promised performance and cost/price. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to demonstrate cost and price reasonableness on all applicable Contract Line-Item Numbers (CLINs). If, after receipt of proposals, the PCO determines that there is insufficient data available to complete the cost/price evaluation, the Offeror shall be required to submit additional cost or pricing data.

The Government issued this solicitation with the anticipation of adequate price competition; therefore, any cost/price documentation requested shall not be certified cost or pricing data. However, in the event that adequate price competition does not exist after receipt of proposals, the Government reserves the right to request additional cost or pricing data as necessary from the Offeror and its business associates and may conduct negotiations with the Offeror, pursuant to RFO Parts 15.403-3(c) and 15.403-3, requiring certified cost or pricing data. “Business Associate” is defined as any type of subcontractor, partner, interdivisional entity, teammate, affiliate, Joint Venture, or other arrangement, other than the Offeror itself, which will perform the contract requirements.

Furthermore, the Offeror may be required to provide a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data prior to award, pursuant to RFO 15.403-3(a) and 15.403-4. The Offeror shall acknowledge the requirement to provide additional cost or pricing information and certify the data prior to award if/when requested by the Government.

Cost/Price Volume Organization The Offeror shall provide a consolidated Cost/Price volume and proposal organized as follows:

Section 1 – Introduction Section 2 – Estimating Techniques/Methods Section 3 – Rates, Labor Category, Skill Level, Escalation Section 4 – Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRAs) if applicable/Proposed Rates for CPIF CLINs X002 and X003, and CPFF CLIN X009 (Table 5) Section 5 – Discussion of Business Systems Section 6 – Prime’s Cost/Price Analysis of Sub/Team Information Section 7 – Other Information Section 8 – Cost/Price Workbook (Attachment L-3) Electronic File Submission The narrative portions of the Cost/Price Volume may be submitted in MS Word or PDF format. However, all cost models, pricing builds, and spreadsheet calculations must be submitted in active and editable MS Excel file with fully functional formulas, in accordance with the Excel Formula Traceability requirements below.

Excel Formula Traceability: The Offeror shall submit all cost models, pricing build-ups, and spreadsheet calculations in active, editable Microsoft Excel format. All Offeror-developed formulas and cell linkages shall be fully functional, visible, and traceable from the lowest-level cost element through the Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The Offeror shall not use hidden cells, hidden worksheets, password-protected worksheets, or hard-coded values where a formula or calculation would logically be required. For example, a burdened labor rate shall be calculated using visible formulas rather than entered as a manually typed value.

Mandatory Cost/Price Workbook: The Offeror shall use Attachment L-3, Cost/Price Workbook, for its Cost/Price proposal. The Offeror shall enter data only in the designated input cells and shall not alter the workbook’s structure, Government-provided formulas, formatting, or protected cells. Government-provided locked cells and protected worksheets shall remain locked and unaltered. Any supplemental Offeror-developed workbook or worksheet submitted in support of the Cost/Price proposal shall remain unprotected and shall contain visible, functional formulas, filters, and supporting calculations sufficient for the Government to evaluate the proposal. Failure to use the Government-provided workbook or unauthorized modification of Government-provided formulas, structure, formatting, locked cells, or protected worksheets may result in the proposal being determined non-compliant and unawardable.

Introductory Section of the Cost/Price Volume As an introduction, the Offeror shall provide narrative support for the Cost/Price proposal volume. The narrative shall explain the philosophy, methodology and assumptions used in proposing the dollar amounts. Any apparent imbalances in the pricing, any unrealistically low or unrealistically high amounts, and any apparent pricing anomalies shall be clearly explained. The Government expects that consistency exists between the Technical and Cost/Price volume; any Offeror-intended inconsistency shall be clearly explained and convincingly demonstrate how the promised performance will be achieved at the proposed cost/price. The narrative should explain any changes in the labor mix year to year.

The Cost/Price Volume shall include a cover sheet that contains the name, address, and telephone number of the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) Contract Administration Office and the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) office responsible for the Offeror’s audit review, including whether the DCAA office has approved the Offeror’s estimating system.

If the Offeror has reached an agreement with Government representatives on the use of forward pricing rates/factors, identify the agreement, include a copy, and describe its nature.

The introduction shall also describe the Offeror’s team structure 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.

The Offeror shall explain all ground rules and assumptions used to develop the proposed prices.

Rounding All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. All loaded labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny.

Offeror Summary The Offeror shall complete Table 4, below, listing all companies – prime and business associates – who will be involved with the performance and management of the contract. (Prime Plus Non-Prime Companies performing a minimum of 5% of total proposed dollars.)

Table 4 Offeror Summary Table

Cost/Price Summaries Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Calculation The sum of the following Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs, Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) Target Costs/Fees, and Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) estimated costs/fees shall constitute the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for the 5-year Base Ordering Period and 4-year Option Ordering Period:

FFP CLINs: X001, X004, X005, X006, X007, and X010, Phase-out CLIN 0099.

CPIF CLINs (Target Cost + Target Fee): X002, X003.

CPFF CLINs (Estimated Cost + Fixed Fee): X009.

Cost (No Fee) CLINs: X008.

All TEP CLINs listed above, along with CLIN 0098, shall be entered into the model contract Section B within their proposal. CLIN 0098 will not be evaluated as part of the TEP.

Phase-In Cost Visibility (CLIN 0098): The Offeror shall separately price the 3-month phase-in period as FFP under CLIN 0098. Offerors shall provide a detailed build-up of the FFP Phase-In price, identifying specific labor hours, travel, materials, and other direct costs associated with transition activities. Phase-in costs shall not be amortized or buried within the direct or indirect rates of the Base Period (Year 1) CLINs.

All Rates (Direct and Indirect Rates for CPIF and CPFF CLINs) Pricing Requirements for Cost-Reimbursement CLINs This section details the specific pricing requirements for the Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (CPIF) and Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) CLINs. Offerors must follow the distinct instructions for each CLIN type as outlined below.

CPIF CLINs X002 and X003 (Offeror-Proposed Cost and Fee) For the CPIF CLINs, the Offeror shall propose a complete and detailed cost estimate reflecting their technical approach. The Offeror shall propose a Target Cost and a corresponding Target Fee. The proposed Target Fee shall not exceed the 8% maximum allowable fee for CPIF contracts. The proposal for these CLINs shall include a detailed buildup of all estimated labor hours, direct rates, indirect rates, and other direct costs.

CPFF CLIN X009 (Government-Estimated Cost) The Government has included a Government-estimated cost (plug number) for the CPFF CLIN X009. The Offeror shall not propose a different cost for this CLIN. The Offeror shall identify their proposed Fixed Fee percentage and corresponding fixed fee amount, ensuring the Fixed Fee does not exceed the 5% maximum allowable fee for CPFF contracts.

Because the Government cannot determine the future level of effort for launch-support requirements at the time of proposal submission, the Offeror is not required to provide detailed staffing data for CLIN X009 in Attachment L-1. The Offeror shall provide the required forward pricing rates and rate substantiation in Attachment L-3 for use in negotiating future task orders.

CLIN X010 — Projects (Government-Estimated Amount) CLIN X010 is included in the TEP using the Government-established amount stated in the model contract. The Offeror shall enter and use the Government-established amount for CLIN X010 and shall not propose a different amount. Because the scope, timing, and level of effort for future project requirements are unknown at the time of proposal submission, the Offeror is not required to provide detailed staffing data for CLIN X010 in Attachment L-1. The Offeror shall provide any required pricing information for CLIN X010 in Attachment L-3, Cost/Price Workbook, in accordance with the instructions for future project pricing.

Rate Breakdown and Substantiation (Applicable to CLINs X002, X003, and X009) For all cost-reimbursement CLINs listed above, the Offeror shall provide a detailed breakdown of fully burdened hourly rates that includes:

· Direct hourly labor rates for each proposed job code.

· All applicable indirect expense rates (e.g., fringe benefits, overhead, General and Administrative [G&A]).

· The proposed fee.

See Table 5 below for the required format for submitting proposed cost data and forward pricing rates (FPR) for CLINs X002, X003, and X009. These rates, if found acceptable by the Contracting Officer, shall be incorporated into the contract as contractually binding maximum allowable rates for negotiating future Task Orders.

Table 5, Breakdown of Rates

Indirect Rate Substantiation: For all proposed indirect rates (Fringe, Overhead, G&A, etc.), the Offeror and its major subcontractors must provide a clear basis of estimate and narrative rationale. If an approved Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA) or Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR) does not exist, the Offeror must provide a minimum of three (3) years of historical incurred cost data (pools and bases) to substantiate the realism of the proposed rates. If proposed rates deviate significantly from historical averages, a detailed narrative must be provided to justify the variance (e.g., changes in accounting structure, projected shifts in business base).

Subcontractor Proprietary Data:

If a subcontractor’s direct and indirect rate data is considered proprietary and they will not release it to the Prime Offeror, the subcontractor shall submit their unsanitized rate build-up (i.e. their rate build-up containing all proprietary cost and pricing data) directly to the Government via the PIEE Solicitation Module (or directly via email to the Contracting Officer if PIEE access is unavailable for the subcontractor) prior to the proposal due date. The Prime Offeror’s proposal must clearly indicate where subcontractor data has been submitted directly to the Government.

Offeror’s Business Systems The proposal shall indicate whether the Offeror has Government approval of the following systems: Accounting System, Estimating System, and Purchasing System. If these systems have been approved by the Government, the Offeror shall provide evidence of the approvals. The Government does not anticipate requesting accounting system reviews before contract award.

In accordance with RFO 16.301-3 and R-DFARS 242.7502, the Offeror and any subcontractor performing cost-reimbursement work must have an adequate accounting system for determining costs applicable to the contract. The Offeror shall indicate, for itself and each applicable subcontractor, whether its accounting system has been audited and determined acceptable, audited and determined not acceptable, or has never been audited.