Attachment 07 TAASC II Section L Final.pdf

Section L – Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

1 (of 35)

FA8100-12-R-0003: RFP ATTACHMENT 07

Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO RESPONDENTS FOR

PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING TRADEOFF SOURCE SELECTION

PROCEDURES.

1. Program Structure and Objective

(a) The Government plans to award up to four (4) contracts for Tinker Assistance and

Advisory Services Contract (TAASC) II. TAASC II will provide non-personal Advisory and

Assistance Services (A&AS) support to Tinker Air Force Base (TAFB), Oklahoma, in support of the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center (OC-ALC) and tenant organizations, Hill Air Force

Base (HAFB), Utah, in support of Ogden Air Logistics Center (OO-ALC), and Robins Air

Force Base, Georgia (RAFB), in support of Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (WR-ALC).

TAASC II herein referred to as TAASC, will assist Government organic resources.

Decentralized ordering will be authorized on a limited basis, anticipated up to approximately five (5) percent of the TAASC ceiling value in support of OO-ALC and WR-ALC. All required support will be provided by awarding and administering competitive Task Orders issued against

Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts. It’s important to note these services will not include inherently governmental functions, or personal services. This acquisition will provide A&AS support to supplement functions for which organic resources are unavailable or prohibitively expensive for the Government to develop organic capability. The Source

Selection Strategy identified for awarding the TAASC IDIQ contracts will be a Tradeoff Source

Selection with technical proposals. Tradeoffs, if made, will be made only between price and past performance and only among those proposals determined to be technically acceptable.

The Government plans to award up to four (4) contracts to Small Business firms. However, the

Source Selection Authority (SSA) reserves the right to award less, if it is in the Government’s best interest, considering the Government’s expected volume of work over the period of the

Task Order contracts, availability of funding, the need to sustain adequate competition, and the availability of quality proposals following completion of proposal evaluations. The total combined value of all Task Orders during the 5-year ordering period is estimated to be $94 million.

(b) TAASC will span a 5-year ordering period, and will be multi-functional, covering the breadth of OC-ALC, OO-ALC, and WR-ALC acquisition and sustainment support requirements, including support in program management, administrative management, data management, facilitation, training, financial management, logistics, contracting closeout, engineering, manufacturing, technical order management, audit, configuration management, and subject matter expert. Individual Task Orders will range from supporting any phase of sustainment of systems, subsystems, components, and equipment to supporting base-wide staff activity.

1.1 Budget/Funding Information

Funding will be obligated as necessary on a task order basis.

2 (of 35)

2. General Instructions

This acquisition will utilize Tradeoff Source Selection procedures, with technical proposals, to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. Tradeoffs will be made only between past performance and price among those Offerors who have been determined technically acceptable. This section of the Instructions to Offerors (ITO) provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by the ITO and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered ineligible for award. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) (RFP/Contract

Attachment 01) and appendices. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in the

ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

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

Elaborate brochures, documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the model contract/solicitation. The offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid until this date.

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

2.1 General Information

2.1.1 Point of Contact

The Contracting Officer (CO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO at the address located in Section A of the model contract/solicitation.

2.1.2 Debriefings

The CO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505.

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 no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The CO will notify unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR

15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing.

3 (of 35)

Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of

FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

2.1.3 Discrepancies

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

2.1.4 Electronic Reference Documents

All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business

Opportunities (FedBizOpps) web site at http://www.fbo.gov. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

2.1.5 Amendments to Solicitation

If this RFP is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended will remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment and provide confirmation upon submission of the offeror’s proposal. Any unacknowledged amendments in the offeror’s proposal are subject to solicitation provision FAR 52.215-1(c).

2.1.6 Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals

Proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in sealed envelopes or packages in paper media and electronic media addressed to the CO at the address shown in Section A of the model contract/solicitation, and showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror.

2.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

(a) The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table

(Table 2.2 below). The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in

Table 2.2. The volumes identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below.

http://www.fbo.gov/

4 (of 35)

Table 2.2 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME

ITO

Paragraph

Number

VOLUME TITLE

Hard Copies/

Electronic

Copies

PAGE

LIMIT

I 3. Executive Summary 2/1 5

3.2 Master Table of Contents Unlimited

II 4. Technical 5/1 30*

1 Technical Subfactor Matrix

Attachment B-3 (Not included in page limit)

2.2(b) Title Page (Not included in page limit)

Unlimited

2.2(c) Teaming List Attachment B-1

(Not included in page limit)

2.2(c) &

4.2.2

Workload Distribution Matrix

B-2 (Not included in page limit)

2.2(d) Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2(d) List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

2.2(d) Glossary of Abbreviations and

Acronyms

Unlimited

4.2.2 Resource Management

(SubFactor 1)

4.2.3 Program Management

(SubFactor 2)

III 5. Relevant Past Performance 4/1

2.2(b) Title Page 1

2.2(c) Teaming List Attachment B-1

(Not included in page limit)

2.2(d) Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2(d) List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

2.2(d) Glossary of Abbreviations and

Acronyms

Unlimited

5.2 Past/Present Performance

Information Sheets (PPIS)

(Attachment A-1)

8 (for each

PPIS)

5.1(b) Consent Letter (Attachment A-

4)

Unlimited

5.1(b) Client Authorization Letter

(Attachment A-5)

Unlimited

5 (of 35)

VOLUME

ITO

Paragraph

Number

VOLUME TITLE

Hard Copies/

Electronic

Copies

PAGE

LIMIT

5.2 Past Performance Questionnaire

(Attachment A-2)

Tab Only

5.3.2 Roadmap 2

IV 6. Cost/Price 2/1 Unlimited

2.2(b) Title Page 1

2.2(c) Teaming List Attachment B-1

(Not included in page limit)

2.2(d) Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2(d) List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

2.2(d) Glossary of Abbreviations and

Acronyms

Unlimited

6.4 Section 1 Unlimited

6.4 Section 2 Unlimited

6.4 Section 3 Unlimited

6.4 Section 4 Unlimited

V 7. Contract Documentation 2/1 N/A

2.2(b) Title Page 1

2.2(c) Teaming List Attachment B-1

(Not included in page limit)

2.2(c) &

4.2.2

Workload Distribution Matrix

B-2 (Not included in page limit)

2.2(d) Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2(d) List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

2.2(d) Glossary of Abbreviations and

Acronyms

Unlimited

7.3.1, 7.3.2

& 7.3.3

Contact Information Unlimited

7.3.5 Teaming List, Arrangement, and/or Letters of Intent

Unlimited

7.1 & 7.3.5 Model Contract N/A

7.1.5 Representations and

Certifications

N/A

* Technical proposal is limited to 30 pages total for subfactors one (1) and two (2).

(b) The offeror’s proposal must show solicitation number, name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror and electronic email address if available on the Title Page, at a minimum.

6 (of 35)

(c) A Team List of the offeror’s primary Point of Contacts shall be submitted in each volume using the format shown in ITO Attachment B-1. In addition, a workload distribution matrix shall be submitted in the technical and contract volume using the format shown in ITO

Attachment B-2.

(d) The offeror’s proposal shall include a table of contents, a list of tables and figures, and a glossary of abbreviations and acronyms in volumes II, III, IV, and V.

(e) The offeror’s technical proposal shall address the information listed in paragraph 4 below. The offeror shall submit five (5) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy of the proposal. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and (for paper copies) will be returned to the Offeror as soon as practicable. Page limitations may also be placed on responses to

Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the offerors. Each page shall be counted except the following:

blank pages, title pages, tables of contents, tabs, indexes, glossaries, and those noted in the

Proposed Organization Chart as unlimited.

2.2.1 Page Size and Format

(a) A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Page line spacing shall be 1.5 lines. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than Times New

Roman 12 points. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall apply to responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

(b) Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. A table of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, and a list of tables and figures shall be provided in all volumes except volume I. These displays shall be uncomplicated and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and count as a single page.

Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics; not for pages of text. The following limitation only applies to the Technical Volume. Text intended for evaluation within all figures, charts, tables, and graphs, to include imbedded images, shall be no less than Times New Roman 8-pt. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals. Any text within figures, charts, tables, and graphs which do not meet this requirement will not be considered in the evaluation. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

2.2.2 Electronic Offers

The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. When discrepancies exist between the written hard copies and those provided in electronic format, the

7 (of 35) written hard copies will take precedence in all cases. The electronic copy shall be submitted on a DVD or Compact Disc Read Only Memory (CD-ROM). The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2007, MS Excel 2007, MS-

Project 2007, and MS-Power Point 2007, or Microsoft Office XP as applicable.

2.2.3 Cost or Pricing Information

All cost or pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the Cost/Price Proposal and

Contract Documentation 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.

2.2.4 Distribution

The "original" proposal shall be clearly identified. Proposals shall be addressed to the

Contracting Officer and mailed or hand-delivered to:

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OC-ALC/PKEA

ATTN: Mary Skaggs

3001 Staff Drive, STE 2Q77

Tinker AFB OK 73145-3020

Telephone: 405-739-9116

Mary.skaggs@tinker.af.mil

3. Volume I - Executive Summary

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

3.1 Narrative Summary

The Offeror shall provide a concise narrative summary of the entire proposal, including significant risks, and a highlight of any key or unique features, excluding cost/price.

The salient features should tie in with Section M evaluation factors/subfactors. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

3.2 Table of Contents

A master table of contents of the entire proposal

4. Volume II - Technical Proposal

4.1 General

The Technical proposal should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in

Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible, the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying these subfactors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your

8 (of 35) proposal submission, you are representing that your firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is neither necessary nor desirable for you to tell us so in your technical proposal. The technical proposal should only address the requirements of the subfactors listed below. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. NOTE: Offerors shall provide completed ITO Attachment B-3, Technical Subfactor Matrix as part of Volume II, Technical Proposal. The Technical

Subfactor Matrix shall be placed at the front of the Volume II, Technical Proposal.

4.2 Format and Specific Content

4.2.1 Technical

In the Technical Volume, address your proposed approach to meeting the minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor.

4.2.2 Subfactor One: Resource Management

Offerors must provide an approach for resource management for the TAASC II program via a

Resource Management Plan. Offerors must also complete Section L, Instructions to Offerors

(ITO) Attachment B-2, Workload Distribution Matrix. The TAASC PWS includes fourteen (14) functional areas of support as shown in PWS paragraphs 1.8.1 through 1.8.14.

As a minimum, the resource management approach shall provide the following essential components:

a. A process to ensure team organization that enables effective coordination of activities among subcontractors, core team members, and, if applicable, mentor/protégé, and joint venture partners. The plan must also demonstrate effective processes for internal team communication and monitoring team performance. The plan must also include a process for facilitation of prompt resolution of task order issues and discrepancies. The plan must include identified lines of communication and delegated authority. (PWS Sections

1.2, 1.4)

b. An approach that ensures that the offeror will provide and maintain a highly qualified, trained, and capable workforce across all 14 functional categories of A&AS support areas IAW the PWS, including, but not limited to, the following: 1) an effective recruiting plan and process to replace employees to include notifying the Government when such replacements become necessary; 2) an effective hiring process for new and replacement employees; and 3) an effective approach for making appropriate personnel available to meet accelerated delivery schedules or surge requirements. (PWS Sections

1.2, 1.4, 1.8)

c. An approach demonstrating a working knowledge of the Government security clearance process that provides an efficient and effective method for ensuring properly cleared personnel are available promptly with emphasis on obtaining properly cleared personnel on short notice. (PWS Sections 1.2, 1.8)

9 (of 35)

4.2.3 Subfactor Two: Program Management:

Offeror shall provide an approach for an integrated TAASC Program Management Plan, to include processes for tracking, monitoring, managing, controlling and auditing task order cost, schedule, and performance. The plan shall address the offeror’s approach to business operations including safety, security, and quality. The plan should represent how the offeror intends to manage all aspects of the TAASC program. The approach shall provide, at a minimum, the following essential components:

a. An approach that demonstrates the process for successful management of business operations supporting TAASC efforts including safety, security, and quality management. Offeror shall further demonstrate its approach in terms of notification and updating the Government of any changes to processes. The plan must include the

Offeror’s process for ensuring timely accomplishment of task order tasks and submission of reports. (PWS Sections 1.2, 4.1, 5)

b. The plan must demonstrate an effective and efficient TAASC oversight process with an emphasis on the Offeror’s oversight of Task Orders and the contract as a whole. The plan must identify processes and/or automated data systems/software used for performance, schedule, and cost management. (PWS Section 1.2)

c. The plan shall identify and describe all risks associated with the transition of existing

TAASC A&AS support requirements to TAASC II and provide acceptable risk mitigation processes that will minimize cost and schedule impacts. The plan must successfully demonstrate the offeror’s approach in terms of minimization of disruption during the transition period while maintaining schedule and cost. (PWS Section 1.2)

5. Volume III – Past Performance

5.1 General

(a) Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in ITO Attachment A-1. This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform the work outlined in the solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance.

(b) Along with the information required in this paragraph, the offeror shall submit a consent letter (ITO Attachment A-4) executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter (ITO Attachment A-5) authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror’s performance.

5.2 Early Proposal Information

10 (of 35)

Each offeror is requested to submit Volume III Past Performance for each relevant contract fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the solicitation closing date. Failure to submit early proposal information will not result in offeror disqualification.

As soon as practicable, offerors shall complete Section 1 of the attached Past Performance

Questionnaire (ITO Attachment A-2) and email it along with the Performance Questionnaire Letter

(ITO Attachment A-3) to all points of contacts (POCs) the offeror has listed in the Past

Performance Information Sheets (ITO Attachment A-1). The POCs will complete the questionnaires and forward them by email to Mary Skaggs (mary.skaggs@tinker.af.mil).

RESPONDENTS TO THE QUESTIONNAIRES SHALL NOT SEND THE COMPLETED

INFORMATION SHEETS BACK TO THE OFFEROR. Offerors shall not follow-up with respondents to ensure they have completed the questionnaires. The Past Performance Team (PPT) will conduct such follow-up with any POC as necessary.

5.3 Relevant Contracts

Submit information in accordance with ITO Attachment A-1: Past Performance Information on a minimum of 3 recent contracts you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. Also include information on a maximum of 3 recent contracts performed by each of your teaming partners and significant subcontractors you consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort. Please only submit information on subcontractors and teaming partners performing key or critical portions of the

A&AS effort. There is no limit on the number of PPIS forms allowed per team; however, offerors are requested to limit responses to those efforts necessary for evaluation and relevant to the A&AS effort. Offeror shall include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance. For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining recency and relevancy, see Section M, - Evaluation Factors, paragraph 2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2 - Past

Performance Factor.

5.3.1 Specific Content

Offerors shall provide a narrative for each Past Performance Information Sheet (PPIS – ITO

Attachment A-1) explaining what aspects of the contracts submitted as past performance information are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort the past performance contracts relate. This narrative may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a limited or no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror shall clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the offeror to be considered a higher confidence candidate. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an Offeror has overcome past problems is required.

Categorize the relevance information into the specific technical subfactors and Cost /Price assessment used to evaluate the proposal.

11 (of 35)

5.3.2 Organizational Structure Change History

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

6. Volume IV - Cost/Price Volume

6.1 General Instructions

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

Attachment 03 (Labor Category Rate Matrix) which is also included in the contract documentation volume.

FAR Part 15 applies; this is not a commercial effort. Up to four (4) contracts will be awarded based on this competition. Contract awardees shall attend the post-award conference and provide requested documentation as part of contract phase-in in accordance with RFP/Contract

Attachment 06, Post-Award Conference PWS.

Cost breakdown of proposed labor rates is neither required nor desired. However, if the offeror considered it necessary to demonstrate their approach or methodology as it relates to development of blended rates and application of prime contractor’s rates to subcontractor costs/ pricing, an example would be acceptable.

6.1.1 Price Reasonableness

These instructions are to assist you in submitting information (i.e., data other than cost or pricing data) that is required to evaluate the reasonableness of your proposed prices.

Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. Note that unreasonable pricing, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or has made an unreasonable proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed pricing rests with the offeror. Note that completeness is one aspect of price reasonableness.

12 (of 35)

6.1.2 Balanced Pricing

The offeror is cautioned against submitting an offer that exhibits unbalanced pricing.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite acceptable Total Evaluated Price (TEP), one or more elements of the TEP (i.e. labor rates, G&A rates, profit rates) is significantly over or understated as indicated by application of price analysis techniques such that there is reasonable doubt the offer would result in the lowest overall cost to the Government, even though it is the lowest priced offeror; or the offer is so grossly unbalanced, its acceptance would be tantamount to allowing an advanced payment.

6.2 Cost/Price Information Requirements

In accordance with 15.403-3(a), data other than cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. If, after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR

15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit cost or pricing data.

Offerors shall complete the pricing spreadsheet entitled Labor Category Rate Matrix

(RFP/Contract Attachment 03). Offerors must ensure that all loaded (fully burdened) labor rates entered are for the applicable Labor Rate Period (for Labor Rate Periods one (1) through six (6)) for each labor category/skill level, site designation (on-site and off-site), and geographical location (OC-ALC, OO-ALC, and WR-ALC) listed in the spreadsheet.

FFP Rates for all labor categories/skill levels, site designation (on-site and off-site), and geographical location (OC-ALC, OO-ALC, and WR-ALC) shall be proposed, with extended pricing for those FFP ceiling rates equaling the TEP. Time and Material (T&M) rates shall not be priced separately – all ceiling rates reflected on RFP/Contract Attachment 03, Labor

Category Rate Matrix will be ceiling rates for both FFP and T&M requirements during Task

Order Fair Opportunity Competition. These T&M rates shall be set at the same ceiling rates as the proposed FFP corresponding rates.

Blended rates are acceptable for proposed rates for all labor categories/skill levels. No additional cost breakdown is required for all proposed rates. Proposed blended rates represent ceiling rate limits on future Task Order proposals. Therefore, proposed blended ceiling rates apply equally to any future FFP Task Orders as well as any T&M Task Orders based on this contract.

The proposed loaded (fully burdened) labor rates based on prime/subcontractor blended rates are considered the fully burdened maximum hourly rate for each labor category/skill level identified for the period of performance identified in Oklahoma City, OK (Tinker Air Force

Base metropolitan area), Warner Robins, GA (Robins Air Force Base metropolitan area), and

Ogden, UT (Hill Air Force Base metropolitan area). For each of these three locations, rates would be anticipated to reflect prevailing local geographical wage rates. Also, for each labor category/skill level rates shall be provided separately for on-site and off-site locations for each of the three centers.

These proposed fully burdened rates shall include all indirect costs (i.e. all supervision and home office support other than contractor Program manager) and factors as well as profit.

13 (of 35)

The awarded rates will be maximum rates and the contractors may not exceed the rates in any task order hereunder for either FFP or T&M Task Orders. It should be noted that proposed ceiling rates for FFP labor categories/skill levels shall also be considered T&M ceiling rates.

Therefore, T&M effort on all future task orders issued will have ceiling limits corresponding to the same FFP labor category/skill level. All T&M task order proposals will be submitted in accordance with DFARS 252.216-7002, ―Alternate A, Time-and-Materials/Labor-Hour

Proposal Requirements—Non- Commercial Item Acquisition with Adequate Price

Competition.‖ However, contractors will be afforded the chance to reduce both the FFP and

T&M rates on future proposals for individual task orders issued.

Note that labor rates proposed on RFP/Contract Attachment 03, Labor Category Rate Matrix will serve as both FFP and T&M ceiling rates on future Task Orders resulting from the basic contract award. Be advised, in evaluating assumption of cost risk, contracting officers shall, except in unusual circumstances, treat time-and-materials as cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts. IAW

FAR 15.404-4(d)(1)(ii)(C).

Offerors must propose a composite rate for each labor category, skill level, and Labor Rate

Period. These evaluated rates shall be based on FFP contract type effort. As fixed priced rates, there is no requirement for demonstration of labor rate cost breakdown to support proposed rates. Composite rates will serve as evaluated rates and shall be based on a blend between prime and subcontractor(s) rates.

It should be noted that such proposed blended rates are developed based solely on contractor risk and must represent a logical balance between striving for competitive advantage and performance risk (i.e., contractors must be able to adequately perform the requirement at the rates proposed as a responsible Offeror). Rates proposed shall be considered ceiling rates, upon which future task order proposed rates shall be based, either equal to or less than the proposed ceiling rates on contract. Such rates must adequately cover effort performed by the prime contractor, subcontractor(s) or a mix of labor effort between prime and subcontractor(s).

A ―no bid‖ or omitted rate may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. An incomplete

Labor Category Rate Matrix will be considered unreasonable since completeness is part of the price reasonableness criteria. The rates in the offeror’s spreadsheet (excluding the

Government’s estimated hours used for evaluation purposes only) shall be incorporated as an attachment of the resultant contract award and shall be the rates used as the maximum ceiling to price subsequent task orders.

For evaluation purposes only, the best estimated hours provided in the Labor Category Rate

Matrix are based on an historical ―snapshot‖ of the number of contracted man-year equivalents

(derived from actual FTE, Full Time Equivalent Positions) utilized for each labor category and projected for future labor rate periods in the RFP/Contract Attachment 03, Labor Category Rate

Matrix. The Government makes no claim that future usage will in any way mirror prior usage or our estimated number of hours; the Government will not be held to level of effort hours used for evaluation purposes only and makes no guarantee regarding level of effort for future task orders issued.

14 (of 35)

Note the following regarding the basic contract award versus task order awards: the competitive basic IDIQ contract award(s) will be based on calculations for firm, fixed priced (FFP) labor rate periods one through six as represented on RFP/Contract Attachment 03, Labor Category

Rate Matrix. At the task order level, future task orders will be based on the following tabular

CLIN structure, utilized in accordance with each specific task order requirement. CLINs 0001 through 0015 will not be utilized in the Total Evaluated Price calculation. The following is for information purposes only and reflects CLIN designation in terms of how CLINs will be designated on a Task Order basis:

CLIN Contract Type

Item Description/

Air Logistics Center

(ALC)

On/Off Site

0001 FFP—labor OC-ALC Tinker AFB On-Site

0002 FFP—labor OC-ALC Tinker AFB Off-Site

0003 FFP—labor OO-ALC Hill AFB On-Site

0004 FFP—labor OO-ALC Hill AFB Off-Site

0005 FFP—labor WR-ALC Robins AFB On-Site

0006 FFP—labor WR-ALC Robins AFB Off-Site

0007 T&M—labor OC-ALC Tinker AFB On-Site

0008 T&M—labor OC-ALC Tinker AFB Off-Site

0009 T&M—labor OO-ALC Hill AFB On-Site

0010 T&M—labor OO-ALC Hill AFB Off-Site

0011 T&M—labor WR-ALC Robins AFB On-Site

0012 T&M—labor WR-ALC Robins AFB Off-Site

0013 Data—NSP All N/A

0014 Travel G&A; Cost No Fee All N/A

0015 Post-Award Conference &

Phase-In--FFP

To be conducted at OC-

ALC

N/A

The RFP/Contract Attachment 03, Labor Category Rate Matrix contains explicit instructions in terms of which CLINs apply to which rates. CLIN 0013 is not separately priced (NSP) as the designated Data CLIN. Offerors shall also provide a ceiling General & Administrative (G&A) rate for each Labor Rate Period for CLIN 0014 – Travel (Cost Reimbursable). Proposed ceiling

G&A rates shall be considered the high limit for proposed future task orders, regardless of actuals at the time of future contract performance in the out-years. These rates will not be included in the TEP calculation. CLIN 0015 represents the post-award conference and fulfillment of the guaranteed contract minimum. Offerors will not propose rates or pricing for

CLIN 0015.

6.2.1 Rounding

All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest cent. All loaded (fully burdened) labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest cent. G&A rates proposed for travel shall be rounded to four decimal points to the right of the decimal point. Additional information is provided in paragraph 6.3, Explanation of Estimating Techniques and Methods. The pricing matrix format

15 (of 35)

(in RFP/Contract Attachment 03, Labor Category Rate Matrix) provides for decimal point places that must be in accordance with the required decimal format. If any pricing proposal deviates from the stated format, the Government will apply the specified format which will provide the basis of extended pricing and TEP.

6.2.2 Profit

Each Offeror proposing as prime contractor shall provide proposed profit rates for this effort for each Labor Rate Period reflected in RFP/Contract Attachment 03, Labor Rate Category Matrix.

Should Offerors provide rates or pricing in which profit rates fluctuate by site designation (on or off-site) and/or geographical location (Tinker AFB, Robins AFB, or Hill AFB), an explanation for fluctuation of proposed rates shall be required.

6.2.3 Proposed Ceiling Rates

Fully burdened (loaded) composite labor rates proposed in the attached pricing matrix shall be considered maximum (ceiling) rates representing a blend of prime and subcontractor(s) rates.

As firm, fixed priced rates, proposed rates shall be in accordance with the Service Contract Act

(SCA) as applicable, or the contractor’s Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

As such, proposed ceiling rates proposed for out-years are considered firm, fixed rates at the ceiling rate and shall not be exceeded to include any upward adjustment in future out-years except as allowed under provisions of the SCA/CBA. This includes subcontractor rate revisions in out-years, as detailed below (Note: the term ―out-years‖ applies to Labor Rate Periods two

(2) through six (6)).

Offerors are strongly advised to seriously note risk for firm, fixed pricing out-years, which is considered contractor risk and not risk to the Government. Proposed pricing shall be sufficient to cover such contract risk of future unknowns, such as subcontractor rate increases in out-years. This also includes unanticipated changes in subcontractors’ pricing in the out-years. For example, as out-year performance periods are reached over time, subcontractor pricing (on which these originally proposed ceiling rates are based) could change. As a result, future subcontractor pricing may not correspond with the original proposed ceiling rates. Revision of proposed, firm, fixed pricing will not be accepted by the Government to cover any additional costs in future out-years except as allowed by SCA. Offerors shall be held to their originally proposed pricing, i.e., ceiling rates per job category/skill level.

If evidence exists that an Offeror is deliberately underbidding for purposes of winning contract award, with the intention of upwardly revising proposed pricing (rates as originally proposed in this competitive source selection) after award to cover costs, the contracting officer will consider such a pricing strategy grounds for determining the price to be unreasonable and may eliminate that proposal from the competition.

6.2.4 Annual Pricing Changes

Provide explanation and justification for any annual proposed price increases greater than 5% per performance period. Provide source reference (e.g., IHS Global Insight) used to determine escalation rates utilized in rate proposal pricing. Annual escalation rates will be reviewed for reasonableness and any indication of unbalanced pricing.

16 (of 35)

6.2.5 Service Contract Act (SCA) and/or Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)

It is the responsibility of the Offeror and subsequent contract awardee to comply with SCA

Wage Determination rates. In this section of the Cost/Price Volume, demonstrate compliance with SCA requirements per Department of Labor (Government point of contact) for any questions regarding use of SCA. As applicable for SCA-covered positions, demonstrate your understanding that all such direct labor rates shall be equal to or exceed the appropriate corresponding Wage Determination rate for the associated geographical locale as required by

SCA-covered labor categories and skill levels.

The offeror, in their proposal, is required to identify the job categories/skill levels they consider subject to the SCA and cross-reference via a SCA conformation table that identify job (labor) categories/skill levels in the Labor Category Rate Matrix with the associated labor categories listed in the Wage Determinations, RFP Attachment 02.

6.2.6 Probable Subcontractors/Teaming Arrangements

All likely teaming partners/subcontractor(s) shall be listed in Section L, Instructions to Offerors, Attachment B1. This list is to include proposed, probable subcontractor(s) and any interdivisional transfers showing a) the subcontractor or teaming partner, and b) brief description of anticipated effort to be performed by these parties. Also provide demonstration of your methodology used to determine subcontract pricing is/will be fair and reasonable (see next paragraph, 6.2.7). In the event subcontractors are dropped and new subcontractors are added, changes or revisions to the proposed ceiling rates will not be accepted and the ceiling rates as originally proposed will remain applicable.

6.2.7 Determination of Subcontractor Pricing Fair and Reasonable

Demonstrate how subcontractors were evaluated and determined to have fair and reasonable proposed pricing. Do not simply declare subcontractor pricing reasonable, but demonstrate how a price reasonableness determination was reached. Indicate whether pricing of subcontractor effort is based on adequate price competition or negotiated pricing. Provide your rationale in the determination of fair and reasonable subcontractor pricing.

6.2.8 Cost/Price Assumptions Used in Development of Proposed Pricing

Information to support reasonableness of proposed pricing is required including supporting data such as estimating methodology to support price reasonableness. All significant assumptions including indirect rates for the Offerors’ appropriate accounting period), scope assumptions and/ or qualifications of the pricing proposal shall be addressed and explained. As detailed below, explanation regarding your intention pertaining to the use of GFP and GFE are also required in the Cost/Price Volume.

6.2.9 Government Furnished Property/Government Furnished Equipment (GFP/GFE)

Provide assumptions regarding usage of GFP and GFE as reflected in your pricing proposal.

When applicable, the Government will furnish, without cost, the GFP/GFE identified in the

Individual Task Order PWS. The GFP/GFE shall only be used for the performance of the

Individual Task Order. All GFP/GFE will remain property of the Government during contract

17 (of 35) performance, completion, and/or termination. The Government will provide building space and equipment (such as a computer) as identified in the Individual Task Order PWS. If this in any way affects proposed labor rates, explanation is required. The RFP includes listing of

Government-provided facilities, equipment, supplies and manpower. Verify your understanding and intention to use particular Government assets by listing those provided by the Government and also separately list all your assumptions regarding facilities, equipment, supplies and manpower provided by contractor(s).

6.2.10 Other Documentation

Other documentation considered by Offerors to be essential for support of proposed pricing shall be presented in this section.

6.2.11 Reduction in Proposed Pricing per Management/Corporate Decision

If any estimated costs/labor rates to perform the proposed effort have been decreased or decremented due to a management decision, provide a summary of the reduction by major cost element summary (e.g., labor direct costs, indirect costs, profit, and so forth as applied to proposed fully burdened labor rates). Provide dollar and percentage estimates of any reduction and demonstrate how such reductions are ensured not to increase performance risk to the

Government, or result in future Requests for Equitable Adjustments (REAs).

6.2.12 Government Field Support Agencies

Offerors shall identify cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and Defense

Contract Management Agency (DCMA) offices responsible for administration of the Offeror’s

Government contracts. Include DCAA/DCMA cognizant agency offices for any and all subcontractors at each tier.

6.3 Explanation of Estimating Techniques and Methods

When responding to the Cost/Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the Offeror may use any generally accepted estimating technique, including contemporary estimating methods

(such as Cost-to-Cost and Cost-to-Non-Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs), commercially available parametric cost models, in-house developed parametric cost models, etc.), to develop their estimates. Where cost estimates of proposed blended (composite) labor rates are based on past experience, explain how the past experience relates to the current effort, including similarities and differences in effort, and how cost data from past experiences was adapted to the current effort labor rates, and so forth. Explain any deviations from previous proposed rates or any deviations from your standard procedures utilized in preparing this pricing proposal.

Additional information will be detailed below in paragraph 6.3.1.

6.3.1 Estimating System

Provide a summary description of your standard estimating system or methods. The summary description shall cover separately each major cost element (e.g., Direct Material, Engineering

Labor, Manufacturing Labor, Indirect Costs, Other Direct Costs (ODC), Overhead, G&A, etc.).

Also, identify any deviations from your standard estimating procedures in preparing this proposal volume. Indicate whether you have Government (Defense Contract Management

Agency (DCMA)) approval of your system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

18 (of 35)

6.3.2 Accounting System

Indicate whether you have Government (DCMA) approval of your accounting system and if so, provide evidence of such approval. Also, identify any deviations from your standard accounting or cost estimating procedures in preparing this proposal.

6.3.3 Purchasing System

Provide a summary description of your purchasing system or methods (e.g. how sources are selected, when firm quotes are obtained, what provision is made to ensure fair and reasonable pricing from subcontractors and other discounts obtained from teaming partners or vendors).

Also, identify any deviations from your standard procedures for preparing this proposal.

Indicate whether you have Government (DCMA) approval of your system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

6.3.4 Cost Reimbursable Travel.

Travel shall be proposed on a task order basis in accordance with FAR 31.205-46, Travel Costs.

No profit or fee is allowed. G&A costs applicable to travel should be provided as required on the Labor Category Rate Matrix. However, this will not be included in the overall TEP calculation.

6.3.5 On-Site and Off-Site Rates.

The offeror shall provide rates for each labor category, skill level, contract type, and Labor Rate

Period for on-site (Government facilities) and off-site (non-Government facilities) for each of the three Air Logistics Centers (ALCs).

6.4 Volume Organization

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

SECTION 1 - Table of Contents; summary descriptions of estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems; changes to estimating, or accounting practices or Cost Accounting

Standards (CAS), if applicable. Although cost breakdowns of proposed fully burdened labor rates are neither requested nor desired, an explanation is required regarding the Offeror’s CAS-covered policies and procedures regarding handling of indirect rates—specifically what types of costs go into the various overhead cost pools and bases; how indirect costs are applied to direct costs. Also explanation is required regarding how indirect rates, G&A and profit are applied to subcontractor rates and whether all subcontractor costs, including the prime contractor’s treatment of indirect rates, G&A and profit regarding how these are applied to subcontractor proposed pricing—are all subcontractor costs, indirect rates and profit included as a base to which prime contractor’s indirect rates, cost of money and profit are applied?