FA489024RACOM Draft ACCOM_II_Section_L and M_1 Aug 23.pdf

FA489024RACOM

Page X of XXX

SECTION L – INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition. (Nov 2021)

FAR Clause 52.215-1(d) Offer expiration date. Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for 180 calendar days.

1. SPECIAL NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1.1 This solicitation is to provide Ninth Air Force Central Command (9AF AFCENT) Aviation Command and Control Operations and Maintenance (ACCOM) services in several locations in the 9AF AFCENT Area of Responsibility (AOR) and within the continental United States (CONUS).

1.2 Only offers submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions will be accepted. Offerors shall not submit more than one offer in response to this solicitation.

1.3 The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date for receipt of proposals. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an Offeror for any costs incurred in the development of the proposal.

1.4 A Secret facility clearance is required. Due to the nature of the requirement, the Contractor shall possess a Secret facility clearance without additional authorization (i.e, National Interest Determination (NID)) at the time of proposal submission.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 This section of the Request for Proposal (RFP) provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the required proposal volumes. Each proposal must include all data and information requested in the RFP. The Offeror shall comply with the solicitation requirements as stated and the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The Offeror’s proposal must reflect a thorough understanding of the services required and display a logical development of the Offeror's plans to implement all PWS requirements as assessed by the RFP evaluation criteria.

2.2 Efforts shall be made to keep offers as succinct as possible with the emphasis being on providing information essential for proper evaluation. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail to substantiate the validity of the Offeror’s stated claims and to facilitate a thorough Government evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal. Submitted documents must contain adequate information to enable the evaluation team to fully ascertain an Offeror's capability to perform contract requirements, must meet the requirements of the RFP, and must address the evaluation factors for award. Where proposing unique or innovative approaches (e.g. proposed strengths or significant strengths), Offerors are advised to clearly identify, explain the particular benefit/advantage to the government, including the duration of such benefit/advantage (i.e. short term or for the life of the contract). The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s self-assessment. The Government reserves the right to incorporate any proposed unique or innovative approach (including strengths and significant strengths) into the awarded contract (see paragraph 5.1).

2.3 All information contained in the proposal an Offeror feels is “Proprietary Information” and therefore not releasable under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), should be labeled “Proprietary Information, Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.”

2.4 Offerors shall acknowledge awareness of all amendments to the solicitation by signing and dating Page 1 of each Standard Form 30, Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract, and including it in proposal Volume IV, Price

2.5 The Contracting Officer (CO) has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition for this acquisition, so offerors are cautioned to submit their best pricing and technical information up-front.

3. FORMAL COMMUNICATIONS

3.1 GOVERNMENT POINTS OF CONTACT (POCS). Any formal communication shall be submitted in writing (via email) to the POCs below. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to confirm receipt of all formal communications.

ACC AMIC/PKF

Mr. Michael Adams, (CO) and MSgt Angel Galindo (CO/CM)

300 Exploration Way; Suite 430

Hampton, VA 23666

Email: michael.adams.106@us.af.mil and angel.galindo@us.af.mil.

Reference: Solicitation FA489024RACOM

3.2 COMMUNICATIONS. Communications between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer (CO) and Contract Manager (CM). Offeror questions and/or comments shall be transmitted via email and will be considered source selection information. The subject line of the emails shall be titled: Solicitation FA489024RACOM Contractor Name, Source Selection Information See FAR 2.101 and 3.104”. No information concerning this solicitation or requests for clarification will be provided in response to Offeror initiated telephone calls.

3.3 OFFEROR QUESTIONS REGARDING THE RFP. After the RFP is released, if Offeror’s have any questions or comments on this solicitation, they shall be sent to the CO and CM via email.

Questions and comments are due no later than XX XXXX 2023 at 1:00 PM EDT

Questions submitted after this date/time may not be answered. The deadline for submitting inquiries will not be extended as a result of an extension to the due date for the receipt of offers unless authorized by the CO.

3.4 DISCREPANCIES. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain any errors, omissions, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing.

3.5 AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best approach/terms for technical, past performance, and price, and be fully and clearly acceptable without additional information. Despite the Government’s intent to award without discussions, the Government reserves the right to enter discussions. Should the Government determine it is in the best interest to open and conduct discussions, discussions will be held only with those Offerors determined to be in the competitive range.

The competitive range will be comprised of the most highly rated proposals based on the ratings of each Offeror’s pass/fail elements, technical past experience, technical solution, and price.

3.6 DEBRIEFINGS. The CO will notify Offerors if a decision is made by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) to exclude the Offeror from the competitive range. If excluded from the competitive range, the Offeror may request and receive a debriefing IAW FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing; they may request a pre-award debriefing, or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing.

The CO will notify unsuccessful Offerors within the competitive range of the source selection decision IAW FAR 15.506. Upon notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing.

Offerors desiring a debriefing shall make their request IAW FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

4. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

4.1 PIEE SOLICITATION MODULE. All referenced documents for this solicitation can be found on the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module at https://piee.eb.mil. The System for Award Management (SAM) posting will reroute viewers to the PIEE Solicitation Module.

The PIEE Solicitation Module is a vendor portal for solicitations within the PIEE platform to automate and secure the process for capturing solicitations, attachments, and responses from Industry.

4.1.1 Additional information and training resources are available at the links below. There are two vendor roles (Proposal Manager, Proposal View Only) for the PIEE Solicitation Module. The Proposal Manager role is required to submit an offer to a solicitation posted in the PIEE Solicitation Module.

The Government strongly recommends offerors add a Proposal Manager role in the PIEE Solicitation Module early and to familiarize themselves with the system to ensure timely proposal submission.

Available trainings:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/index.xhtml

Overview of Solicitation Module:

https://dodprocurementtoolbox.com/cms/sites/default/files/resources/2021- 08/Solicitation%20Module%20Overview%2020210414.pdf

Vendor Access Instructions and Account Support Contact Information:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Access_Instruction s.pdf

Proposal Manager Instructions in the Solicitation Module:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Proposal_Manager.pdf

4.1.2 All Vendors can view this solicitation in the PIEE Solicitation Module by selecting “Search” once logged in and entering FA489024RACOM into the “Solicitation Number” search criteria.

4.2 Proposal Submission. Proposals shall only be submitted via the PIEE Solicitation Module. The offeror shall establish a Proposal Manager account in sufficient time to access documents and submit offers within the RFP’s submission deadline. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to be fully knowledgeable and capable regarding PIEE. Offerors must not rely on the Government to assist Offerors in understanding how to use PIEE or transmit proposals within PIEE. If there are issues, please refer to the PIEE resources and PIEE help desk for assistance.

4.2.1 Offeror’s proposals shall be created and saved using Microsoft Word 2016 (.docx format only) or later, and/or searchable Adobe PDF Version XI or later for all volumes, except for the ACCOM II Pricing Excel workbook (Attachment 4), referenced/contained in Volume IV: Factor 6 – Price/Cost, which shall be submitted in MS Excel format only. Offerors shall NOT submit any documents in PDF that cannot be electronically searched. Files shall be named in an unambiguous manner, using plain language text. Include the file name in the header of each document. For example, [Offeror Name] FA489024RACOM, Volume IV: Factor 6 – Price/Cost. The total combined file size for all files uploaded simultaneously can be up to 1.9 GB.

4.2.2 Proposals must be received no later than 2:00 PM EST on XX XXXX 2023. Offerors are strongly encouraged to plan accordingly, submit proposals well in advance of the designated submission deadline, and ensure affirmative receipt of proposals. After successfully submitting the proposal, a success message of the submission will be displayed in the Solicitation module and the offer display will collapse. The “message of submission”, a red lined box, will be your confirmation and should state date and time of submission in a format similar to: “The offer was submitted on 2023- 04-25 10:51:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time (2023-04-25 15:51:07 UTC) by Proposal Manager.

Please print this page and maintain for your records.” The Solicitation Module automatically tracks the date and time of all submissions.

4.2.3 Offerors are cautioned to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation to ensure submission of a complete proposal. Failure to furnish a complete proposal at the time of proposal submission may result in the proposal being considered non-compliant by the Government and eliminated from consideration for award. Late proposals will be processed IAW FAR 52.215. The Government will retain the proposal; however, the proposal will not be evaluated or considered for award.

4.3 Contact Information. Offeror shall provide:

Names, titles, addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, even if that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

4.4 Disposition of Proposals. In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8, the Government will retain one

(1) copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Extra copies of unsuccessful proposals will be destroyed.

No destruction certificate will be provided.

5. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

5.1 The following instructions prescribe the format for proposals and describe the approach to be used for the development and presentation of the proposal data. The proposal shall include all of the information requested in the specific instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the PWS will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand the proposal and perform a thorough and fair evaluation of it. The Government may incorporate into the contract by reference or full text portions of the successful Offeror’s proposal as revised and supplemented through the final proposal revision that is submitted in response to the solicitation.

5.2 Proposal Volumes. Proposals shall be prepared in four (4) separate and distinct volumes:

Volume I: Phase 1

Factor 1 – Facility Security Clearance

Factor 2 – Small Business Participation

Factor 3 – Training, Certification, and Transition

Volume II: Phase 2

Factor 4 – Technical Solution

Volume III: Phase 2

Factor 5 – Past Performance

Volume IV: Phase 2

Factor 6 - Price

5.3 Proposal Format. The proposal shall be submitted in electronic format only, per L-4.2; text type size shall not be smaller than Microsoft Word Times New Roman 12 point font, single column, normal proportional spacing and one inch (1”) margins (top, bottom, left and right). The text for charts, tables, graphs, and figures shall be no smaller than Microsoft Word, Times New Roman or Arial Narrow, 8 point font. Text lines and table lines of text shall be single-spaced. Information submitted shall not exceed the page limits stated below for each volume.

5.4 What Counts as a Page. A page shall be an 8 ½” x 11” sheet of paper. Fold-outs shall not exceed 11” x 17” and shall count as two (2) pages. Fold-outs shall be kept at a minimum, and shall be used only where a table or other graphic cannot be accommodated by a single 8-1/2” x 11” page. All material shall be contained within the page limit identified for each volume, and all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc., are included in the page count, with exception of items stated in the next paragraph.

5.5 Pages Not Included in Page Count. The organizational chart, list of abbreviations and acronyms, and cross-reference matrix will not be included in the page count. Covers for volumes, tables of contents, indices, title pages, and section dividers/tables will not be included in the page count if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. They will be counted if they contain any other information, e.g., diagrams, extraneous data, etc. Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” and without any additional information will not be counted. The Executive Summary will not be included in the proposal page limitation stated in L-5.6 and, if applicable, exceptions will be documented in each volume’s executive summary.

5.6 Copies and Page Limits. Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. If the page limit is exceeded, the excess pages will be removed from the proposal and returned unread to the Offeror. Copy requirements and page limitations are as follows:

VOL TITLE Page Limit

I PASS/FAIL

Factor 1: Facility Security Clearance None

Factor 2: Small Business Participation None

Factor 3: Training, Certification, and Transition 15

II TECHNICAL1 75

III PAST PERFORMANCE2 See section L.8.1

IV PRICE3 None

Notes: An Executive Summary shall be included in Volume I, II, and III – each summary shall not exceed 3 pages.

1. The Technical Volume shall describe the Offeror’s technical approach. It includes Subfactors A and B.

2. Past Performance Information (PPI) contract references—See Instructions for Volume II—Past Performance, paragraph

L.8.

3. The Price Volume is for price only – Technical or Past Performance Information shall not be included in this volume. One original proposal, which includes a signature on the SF33 required by Volume III, Par L.9.2, shall be submitted.

5.7 Cross-Referencing. Offerors shall not cross reference between Volumes I, II, III, and IV. 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.

5.8 Exceptions. 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. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. If the Offeror finds it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the Offeror shall clearly identify the applicable Volume and exceptions with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken, what benefit accrues to the Government (if any), and its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, price and specific requirements of the solicitation. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Offerors are cautioned that taking an exception may render the offer ineligible for award. This information shall be provided in the format below.

Table 1 - Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation Document

Page/Paragraph Requirement/Portion Rationale & Impact

Contract Line Items section, PWS, Section L and Section M, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe the rationale and impact of the exception

5.9 If the Offeror takes no exception to any of the stated requirements in the solicitation, a statement to this effect is required at the front of each proposal volume in the executive summary.

6. INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME I – PASS/FAIL (FACTORS 1, 2, & 3)

6.1 Factor 1: Facility Security Clearance:

6.1.1 The Offeror shall submit evidence of a SECRET facility clearance (FCL) for the Prime, Teaming Partners, or Joint Venture.

6.1.1.1 A FCL is required. An Offeror without the requisite FCL will not be permitted as the prime contractor due to the required security classification. Offerors shall possess or acquire a FCL equal to the requirement on the Form DD254 “Contract Security Classification Specification” (Attachment 3 not included in this draft) without additional authorization (i.e. National Interest Determination (NID)) by the proposal due date. If an Offeror does not have the required FCL at the time of proposal submission, the proposal will not be evaluated and is not eligible for award.

However, a Secret FCL is not required for the Joint Venture (JV) itself if the Offeror is an unpopulated JV and all members of the JV possess a Secret FCL. A JV without its own FCL will not have access to classified information and all access will solely be through the cleared JV members. Therefore, a JV without its own FCL is required to submit, as part of its proposal, a Security Plan/Standard Operating Procedure which, at a minimum, includes the following:

a. Identification of the JV member that will be responsible for implementing and managing all security program requirements;

b. A description of the JV and JV members’ roles and responsibilities to ensure compliance with 32 CFR Part 117, NISPOM;

c. A copy of the JV agreement(s) relating to the establishment of the JV and any subcontracts awarded to the individual JV members as they relate to this solicitation and all security responsibilities;

d. A completed Standard Form 328, "Certificate Pertaining to Foreign Interests" for the JV;

e. Execute a formal exclusion resolution stating that the JV will not require and will not have access to classified information.

f. The JV members and all subcontractors shall execute similar resolutions excluding the JV from access to classified information.

6.1.1.2 If a contractor does not have this type of clearance at the time of proposal submission, the proposal will not be evaluated and is not eligible for award. If none of the proposing JV members have the required facility clearance to meet this requirement the JV is ineligible for award. The 9AF AFCENT Office will NOT sponsor offerors for facility clearances.

6.2 Factor 2: Small Business Participation

6.2.1 A subcontracting plan is required IAW FAR 52.219-9 for Other than US Small Businesses only.

Offerors are required to submit either an individual subcontracting plan, an approved commercial plan, or a negotiated DoD Comprehensive Test Program subcontracting plan. In addition, Offerors are required to complete the DoD Checklist for Reviewing Subcontracting Plans (Attachment 5) along with their subcontracting plan submittal.

6.2.1.1 Other than US Small Business Offerors must submit a subcontracting plan that meets the requirements of FAR 19.704, FAR 52.219-9 (Alternates and Deviations), and DFARS 252.219-

7003 (or DFARS 252.219-7004 if the Offeror has a DoD Comprehensive Test Program subcontracting plan).

6.2.1.2 Subcontracting plans will be reviewed on an PASS/FAIL basis for compliance with FAR 19.704, FAR 52.219-9 (Alternates and Deviations), and DFARS 252.219-7003 (or DFARS 252.219-7004 if the Offeror has a DoD Comprehensive Test Program subcontracting plan).

6.2.1.3 The subcontracting plan shall be included in the offer, and the approved subcontracting plan shall be incorporated into the contract under Section J.

6.3 Factor 3: Training, Certification, and Transition

6.3.1 Training and Certification: The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive Training and Certification Plan that includes the following:

6.3.1.1 An effective vetting process that ensures only qualified personnel are hired, trained and certified for each job category/position.

6.3.1.2 An explanation of the initial, continuation, and supplemental training and certifications required for all manning positions.

6.3.2 Transition: The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive phased-in execution strategy for manning that includes the following:

6.3.2.1 A discussion of transition risk factors identified by the Offeror and the Offeror’s strategies to eliminate or mitigate these identified risks.

6.3.2.2 An Excel spreadsheet that clearly depicts all Phase-In actions with start and completion dates which ensures the Offeror will be prepared for full performance on the contract start date.

6.3.2.3 An explanation of how the Offeror shall interface with Government personnel in a manner that minimizes disruption of the mission.

6.3.2.4 A discussion of phase out at the end of the contract to assure a smooth and efficient transition and contract close-out.

7. INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME II – TECHNICAL SOLUTION (FACTOR 4)

7.1 To facilitate the evaluation, the Technical Volume should be specific, detailed, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements to accomplish the effort. This volume of the proposal shall consist of the Offeror’s technical approach, addressing risk management or mitigation strategies, if applicable. The Offeror shall provide a clear and concise description of how the Offeror plans to meet or exceed the requirements of the RFP, specifically identifying any innovations or efficiencies that would result in cost reductions, cost avoidance, or qualitative improvements resulting in a benefit to the Government in relation to the PWS and the technical evaluation subfactors. The Source Selection Authority, in consultation with the Source Selection Evaluation Board and advisors, is the sole arbiter of whether or not qualitative improvements represent a benefit to the Government. Statements that the Offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS (including Air Force (AF) publications, technical requirements, etc.); statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof (including applicable AF publications, technical data requirements, etc.); and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Offerors should note that data submitted prior to the proposal submission, including data submitted for current contracts and other solicitations, will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation. Therefore, such data should not be relied upon, nor incorporated in, the Technical Volume by reference. Offerors shall address the requirements noted in this section by imperative verbs regardless of whether such requirements are preceded by “the Offeror shall”. The Offeror’s proposal shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the Technical Criteria set forth in Section M, Evaluation Criteria, of this solicitation. All information that the Offeror deems appropriate to address for this factor and subfactors must be included in the proposal in an orderly format. The Technical Volume shall address all the technical subfactors. This volume shall not contain any pricing data.

7.2 Technical Solution Contents

7.2.1 Table of Contents. A table of contents shall be included in Volume II. Each subfactor/section shall be clearly marked and tabbed for easy reference and pages shall be numbered in a consistent manner as stated under Proposal Preparation Instructions.

7.2.2 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. Each volume shall contain a list of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each.

7.2.3 Executive Summary. The Offeror’s Executive Summary is limited to 3 pages and should include a concise summary of the Offeror’s proposed approach to the ACCOM effort.

7.2.4 Technical Factor Cross Reference Matrix (Section L: Attachment 1). 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. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. The Offeror shall fill out the cross reference matrix indicating the proposal reference information as it relates to the RFP, PWS, and CLIN references found therein.

7.2.5 Subfactor A: Program Management. The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive discussion of its Program Management that provides the following:

7.2.5.1 A plan that clearly articulates the integrated management structure to meet or exceed the PWS requirements. This includes the organizational structure (including an organizational chart), appropriate leadership hierarchy, lines of authority and communication from an enterprise perspective.

7.2.5.2 A detailed breakdown of each manning position’s annual work capability to include: direct time, indirect time, ancillary training time, scheduled leave, holidays, and any other workload capability factors which may affect proposed manpower.

7.2.5.3 A workload analysis that clearly explains all proposed training, logistics, deployment requirements, and operational management for each site. This analysis must clearly show how the Offeror arrived at the proposed manpower and demonstrate a clear understanding of priority allocation of resources and personnel.

7.2.5.4 An effective, integrated Quality Management System (QMS) that creates a quality culture and addresses the fundamental principles of the most current ISO 9001 standard, with special focus on processes needed for the QMS and its application throughout the organization to ensure a continuous, proactive, preventive-based monitoring, measurement and analysis program that uses quantifiable metrics and emphasizes conformance to the PWS, mitigation of risk, and continuous performance improvement. Processes should include management activities, provision of resources, service realization, and performance measurement, especially of Service Summary items.

7.2.5.5 A comprehensive explanation of the ways it will provide efficiencies effectiveness in the program which includes an explanation of how the company will streamline maintenance, ATC, and AFM processes to maximize efficiencies from an enterprise perspective.

7.2.6 Subfactor B: Retention Strategy. The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive retention process/plan that includes:

7.2.6.1 A strategy to retain sufficient, qualified personnel for each job category/position.

7.2.6.2 How the Offeror will identify and address hard to fill positions.

7.2.6.3 Specific quality of life measures they intend to employ to reduce personnel burnout, high turnover, and low retention.

7.2.6.4 The company’s retention rates and fill rates on Federal contracts for the past three years to demonstrate its experience in retaining personnel.

8. INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME III -- PAST PERFORMANCE (FACTOR 5)

8.1 Past Performance Volume Contents. The offerors’ Past Performance Volume shall, at a minimum, contain the following sections:

8.2 Past Performance Information (PPI) Contract References. Offerors must provide information for a maximum of three (3) contract references. For teaming partners performing critical functions or more than 20% of the total contract value, one (1) additional reference (each) is allowed and this teaming partner should be identified as a major subcontractor. If the PPI reference is an overarching Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) or Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA), the Government will only assess performance at the IDIQ level and not performance on each individual underlying task/delivery order. If offerors would like assessment of an individual task/call/delivery/purchase order, the Offeror shall submit that as a separate PPI reference.

8.3 Past Performance Recency. Recency is defined as active contract performance (minimum of 12 months) during the five (5) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation. References for contracts with less than 12 months of performance will not be considered.

8.4 Past Performance Relevancy. Offerors shall submit performance information on contracts they consider relevant to this effort. This information should include rationale supporting the Offeror’s assertion of relevance. 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. When applicable, categorize and cross-reference the relevance of the information into the specific relevancy criteria as defined in Section M of this solicitation. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy.

8.5 Performance Data Evaluation. The Government evaluation team will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of all performance data obtained to determine how closely the work performed under those efforts relates to this proposed effort. The Government may confirm past and present performance data identified by Offerors in the proposal and may obtain additional performance data from other sources.

8.6 PPI Contents. For each past performance reference submitted the reference shall include the following information:

a. PRIME Contract Number in Reference

b. Dollar Value

c. Period of Performance

d. Company / Organization Name, Full Address, POC Email & Telephone Number

e. SAM Unique Entity ID, CAGE Code & DUNS Number

f. Current Point of Contact (POC) (i.e., CO, Technical Program Manager, COR, etc.) and Current

1 Table of Contents. NTE one (1) page

2 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms No page restriction

One-page table listing the past performance citations included for easy identification

NTE one (1) page

4 Past Performance Information (PPI) Sheets Each PPI NTE two (2) pages. See Para L.8.2

5 Organization Structure Change History NTE two (2) pages (bullet format, narrative not required). See Para L.8.7

6 Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letter NTE one (1) page per subcontractor/ teaming partner. See Para L.8.8

Email Address & Telephone Number(s) for listed POCs

g. Summary of the work performed. For each cited past performance reference, describe the nature and portion of work performed. Further, estimate the percentage of the total effort performed.

8.7 Organization 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 present or 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 chart or schedule describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance assessment. Since the Government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as information provided by the Offeror(s), your chart or schedule should be specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts for which the Government receives information from other sources.

8.8 Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letter (Section L: Attachment 2). Past performance information concerning subcontractor and teaming partners cannot be disclosed to a private party without the subcontractor’s or teaming partner’s consent. Because a prime contractor is a private party, the Government will need that consent before disclosing subcontract/teaming partner present and past performance information to the Prime during interchanges. In an effort to assist the Government in assessing your past performance relevancy and confidence, we request that a consent form be completed by the major subcontractors/teaming partners identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume.

8.9 Past Performance Information from Other Sources. Past performance information for contracts not listed by the Offeror and/or past performance information for contracts of planned subcontractor(s) may also be evaluated. The Government may utilize references other than those identified by offerors in evaluation of offeror’s past performance. Past performance information may be obtained through one or more of the following: 1) Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS); 2) similar systems of other Government departments and agencies; 3) Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels; 4) completed questionnaires from Program Managers and Contracting Officers; and 5) other sources, including commercial sources. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of demonstrating relevancy and providing current, accurate, and complete past performance information rests solely with the Offeror.

8.10 Adverse Past Performance. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. When a relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness. The Government reserves the right to communicate with any offeror who will be excluded from competition because of adverse past performance information unless the offeror has previously had the opportunity to comment on such information.

9. INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME IV – PRICE (FACTOR 5)

9.1 The Offeror shall complete Attachment 4, ACCOM II Pricing Matrix spreadsheet. This includes a worksheet for Section B of the solicitation (entitled “3 – Section B”) which will be completed by inserting the UNIT PRICE for all Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract line item numbers (CLINS), including Transition, Base Period and Options. EXTENDED PRICE and a six-month extension of services IAW FAR 52.217-8 will be automatically calculated by the worksheet. For ease of administration, all TOTAL pricing should be rounded to whole dollar amounts and be divisible by 12.

For the Cost Reimbursable CLINS, the solicitation will provide NTE dollar figures that will become part of the total overall evaluated price (TOEP) for all Offerors. The breakout of costs for CLIN 0063 and its subsequent option CLINs will include the fully burdened FFP rates strictly used for any future contingency requirements under those CLINs and will be captured in worksheets 4 – 10. Although these rates will not be included in TOEP the Government will evaluate them IAW FAR 15.404-1(b). The data captured in Worksheet 11 – TERPS Rates will be used to verify that the requirements of SCA WD 2015-4341 Rev 22 and SCA 2015-4439 Rev 19 are met.

9.2 Complete in its entirety the "Offeror" portion of the Standard Form 33. An official having authority to legally bind the company contractually must sign and date the Standard Form 33. One copy of the Standard Form 33 must bear an original signature and if applicable, all amendments. Failure to acknowledge any amendments to the solicitation can result in an Offeror being deemed non-compliant.

9.3 Representations and Certifications. Complete the required Representations and Certifications or indicate if information is contained in the SAM located at https://sam.gov.

9.4 Supporting Price Backup Data. Certified cost or pricing data is not required. However, supporting data is requested to verify that pricing is balanced per FAR 15.404-1(g). Supporting data should explain the methodology used in developing proposed CLIN prices. Supporting data shall be provided in Excel, to include, at a minimum, a breakdown (by CLIN) of labor (labor category, number of positions and productive hours and rates used), breakout of Other Direct Costs (ODC), Direct and Indirect Rates, maintenance costs and subcontract costs. Supporting data may be submitted in a format selected by the Offeror but must address the information requested in this paragraph. The Government reserves the right to request additional pricing information after receipt and evaluation of proposals.

9.5 Offerors shall identify the cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) field offices that have oversight of the Offeror’s organization. Provide information concerning the adequacy of your accounting system pertaining to accumulation of costs for the cost reimbursable CLINs. If DCAA has already determined the Offeror’s accounting system adequate, the Offeror shall provide the referenced DCAA audit report number and report date. Since a portion of the contract requirements will be included on a cost reimbursable basis, provide a copy of your Disclosure Statement with the proposal, as well as identification of compliance with Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), if applicable, and any CAS violations and subsequent corrections.

Additionally, provide evidence of a DCMA acceptable purchasing system (if applicable) which is in compliance with your Disclosure Statement. Also, document adequacy determinations relating to your Disclosure Statement. Offerors shall also provide any information that pertains to a recent DCMA or DCAA financial capability assessment. Offerors shall provide evidence of indirect rates and factors used in the price schedule have been audited/approved by DCAA/DCMA. If an Offeror has never dealt with DCAA, Offerors shall review the website at www.dcaa.mil and identify the cognizant DCAA office.

9.6 Offerors shall provide a written statement that they will comply with Host Nation (HN) laws.

9.7 Offerors shall indicate in their proposal that their prices are valid for 180 days from the date of receipt of proposals and it will furnish the services identified in its proposal at the price offered within the specified timelines of the contract.

10. DEBRIEFING OF OFFERORS.

10.1 Debriefings are conducted with the goal of identifying to unsuccessful offerors where changes can be made to improve future source selection participation.

10.2 Successful or unsuccessful offerors may request debriefings by providing a written request to the Procuring Contracting Officer. Debriefings shall be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.505 for pre-award debriefings and FAR 15.506 for post-award debriefings.

SECTION L: ATTACHMENT 1

Technical Factor Cross-Reference Matrix

As part of Offerors’ proposals, a separate cross-reference matrix shall be completed and submitted with Volume II

- Technical. All referenced paragraphs include all subsequent subparagraphs (for example, 7. includes 7.1, 7.2, 7.2.1, etc.). This is only a tool to assist in the proposal preparation process. Offerors are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their proposal fully addresses all areas and that all requested information is completed in accordance with this solicitation. Offerors shall complete the last column of this attachment with paragraph number references from their Technical Volume. Offerors may provide additional references to the other columns as deemed necessary.

Subfactors Reference Service Summary Item

Section L Section M Proposal Paragraph(s)

Subfactor A:

Program Management

Subfactor B:

Retention Strategy

TECHNICAL SOLUTION FACTOR CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX

SECTION L: ATTACHMENT 2

Sample Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form Letter

TO: ACC AMIC/PKF DATE: MM/DD/YYY

Mr. Michael Adams, (CO) and MSgt Angel Galindo (CM/CO)

300 Exploration Way; Suite 430 Hampton, VA 23666

Email: michael.adams.106@us.af.mil and angel.galindo@us.af.mil.

FROM: (Company name, address and “current” POC)

REFERENCE: Request for Proposal FA489024RACOM, ACCOM Support Services

SUBJECT: Letter of Consent to Release Past and Present Performance Information to (XX Company)

To whom it may concern, We are currently participating as a (subcontractor/teaming partner) with (prime contractor or name of entity providing proposal) in responding to the Department of the Air Force, (location) Request for Proposal (solicitation number) for the (program title or description of effort).

We understand that the Government is placing increased emphasis on past performance in order to obtain best value in source selections. In order to facilitate the performance confidence assessment process we are signing this consent form to allow you to discuss our past and present performance information with the prime contractor during the source selection process.

Respectfully, (Signature and Title of individual who has the authority to sign for and legally bind the company)

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.204-22 Alternative Line Item Proposal JAN 2017

52.222-46 Evaluation Of Compensation For Professional Employees

FEB 1993

SECTION M – EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. BASIS OF AWARD

1.1 This competitive best value source selection will be conducted using the tradeoff process in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation; and subjective trade off processes as described in Department of Defense (DOD) Source Selection Procedures and Department of the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DAFFARS) Mandatory Procedures 5315.3. The Government intends to award a single contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror (IAW FAR Part 9) whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, will be the most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

1.2 Ratings will focus on each proposal’s pass/fail elements, technical solution (assessing significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies), past performance (Performance Confidence), and price. Phase 1 factors will be pass/fail. The Government will evaluate all Factors within Phase 1 as either PASS or FAIL. The Offeror’s proposal must receive a PASS rating for all Factors within this phase before advancing to Phase 2 of the proposal evaluation process. The Government will trade off technical and past performance proposals in Phase 2. Within Phase 2, Technical Solution is more important than Past Performance, which is more important than Price.

Together, Technical Solution and Past Performance are significantly more important than Price. This may result in an award being made to a higher rated, higher priced Offeror where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines that the technical solution of a superior Offeror outweighs the proposals and price differences as compared to other Offerors. Phase 1 evaluation factors will not be part of the tradeoff. The SSA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of all evaluation factors. While the Government evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

1.3 The Government intends to award without discussions IAW FAR 52.215-1. The Government may make a final determination as to whether the Offeror’s proposal is the best value solely on the basis of the initial proposal as submitted. Accordingly, Offerors are advised to submit an initial proposal that is its best approach/terms for technical, past performance, and price and is fully and clearly acceptable without additional information. Should the Government determine it is in their best interest to open and conduct discussions, discussions will be held only with those Offerors determined to be in the competitive range. The competitive range will be comprised of the most highly rated proposals based on the ratings of each Offeror’s pass/fail elements, technical, past performance, and price. In the event a competitive range is established, and the Government determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

1.4 While the Government intends to award without discussions, the Government reserves the right to enter into discussions. If the Government holds discussions, the Government may issue evaluation notices to Offerors in the competitive range. Formal responses to evaluation notices and final proposal revisions will be considered in making the source selection decision for award.

1.5 Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will be requested from each Offeror in the competitive range at the conclusion of discussions, if conducted. Any revision or non-concurrence to contract terms and conditions in the submitted FPR may not be subject to further discussion or negotiation. This provision is not intended to restrict the Offeror’s opportunity to revise figures (e.g., prices, discounts, percentages, rates, etc.); rather, it is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government which could result if new, or revised terms and conditions, are submitted in the FPR that have not been fully disclosed, discussed, and understood during discussions. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the FPR, may render the offer unacceptable to the

Government.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS AND METHODOLOGY

2.1 Proposals will be evaluated in two phases. Phase 1 will consist of three PASS/FAIL Factors: (Factor 1) Facility Security Clearance, (Factor 2) Small Business Participation, and (Factor 3) Certification, Training, and Transition. Phase 2 will consist of three trade-off Factors: (Factor 4) Technical Solution and (Factor 5) Price/Cost. Technical Solution is more important than Past Performance which is more important than Price. When combined, Technical Solution and Past Performance are significantly more important than Price. There are two subfactors within Factor 4-Technical Solution: (A) Program Management (B) Retention Strategy. Subfactors are listed in order of importance. The greater the equality of proposals for factors other than price, the more important price becomes in selecting the best value for the Government.

2.2 As a basis for award, price is of secondary consideration; therefore, the Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest proposed price. Price is not expected to be the most significant factor in the selection of an Offeror for this solicitation; however, the degree of importance of price as a factor could become greater depending upon the equality of the proposals for the other factors evaluated.

When competing proposals are evaluated and determined to be equal, total price and other price factors would become the most significant factor. Prices will be evaluated to determine if the proposed price is reasonable and to assess the Offeror’s understanding of the solicitation. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between technical and price must be clearly explained in the price proposal. For example, if unique and innovative approaches are the basis for an abnormally priced cost estimate, the nature of these approaches and their impact on price must be completely documented. The burden of proof of price credibility rests solely with the Offeror. Price proposals will not be rated or scored.