Attachment_E_Section_L_Amend_0002.pdf

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (ITO)

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO RESPONDENTS FOR

PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING TRADEOFF SOURCE SELECTION

PROCEDURES

1.0 Program Structure and Objective

1.0.1 The Government plans to award a single contract for the T-1A Avionics Modification Program (AMP). The Contractor shall act as a single integrator to provide a turnkey solution for the avionics replacement as described in the SOW for the T-1A aircraft and corresponding simulators: Operational Flight Trainer (OFT) and Part-Task Trainer (PTT). The Government requests each offeror (single CAGE/DUNS) to submit their overall single best approach that will meet all stated requirements in the solicitation. The Government requests no more than one proposal for each respective cage code/DUNS.

1.0.2 The Government plans to award a basic contract with options as a result of this solicitation. Award will be made on the basis of “best value” utilizing tradeoff source selection procedures. The tradeoff will be between technical risk, past performance, and price among those Offerors who have been determined technically acceptable.

Award will be made to the contractor that provides the “best value” to the Government over the entire period of performance. The Government intends to award without discussions but reserves the right to conduct discussions if necessary.

1.0.3 Initial funding will be obligated for the basic period of performance which includes non-recurring engineering, certification, and Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) contract line item numbers (CLINs).

1.0.4 To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. The response shall consist of four (4) separate volumes; Volume I – Technical Proposal, Volume II – Past Performance Information; Volume III – Price Proposal; and Volume IV – Contract Documentation.

1.0.5 All or parts of the Contractor’s Technical Proposal may be added to the contract.

Should there be any discrepancies between the Technical Proposal and the Statement of Work (SOW), the SOW shall take precedence.

2.0 General Instructions

2.0.1 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 Offerors proposal must include all data and information requested by the ITO and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the SOW and System Requirements Document (SRD), appendices and solicitation terms, conditions, representations and certifications. Alternate proposals are not acceptable. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered ineligible for award. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation or exclusion from the competition.

2.0.2 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 the 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 Offerors proposal.

2.0.3 Text of proposals will be submitted in English. Proposals received in languages other than English shall be rejected.

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

2.0.5 The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the Request for Proposal (RFP), which will become the model contract/solicitation. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in Volume IV of the proposal documentation that the proposal is valid until the date specified in Section A of the solicitation.

2.0.6 In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (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 the address located in Section A of the model contract/solicitation. The buyer name is located in Section A, however the address in Section A is the correct address for the PCO.

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. 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.

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 Oral Presentation

Oral presentations will not be utilized.

2.1.6 Amendments to Solicitation

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

2.1.7 Communications

Exchanges of source selection information between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the CO. E-mail (encrypted when possible or with password protected attachments) may be used to transmit such information to Offerors and shall include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line.

Additionally, source selection information may be transmitted via facsimile (encrypted when possible), U.S. Postal (or like service) delivery, and/or oral with telephonic or face-to-face meetings.

http://www.fbo.gov/

2.1.8 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

2.2.1 The Title Page of each volume must show solicitation number, name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the Offeror and electronic e-mail address if available.

2.2.2 A Team List of the Offerors primary Point of Contacts shall be submitted in each volume using the format shown in Attachment 2 of the ITO.

2.2.3 The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table 2.1 below). The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 2.1. The attachments identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below.

Table 2.1. Proposal Organization

Volume

Instruction to Offerors Paragraph

Number

Volume Title

Hard Copies/

Disk Copies

Page Limit

I 3.0 Technical 4/1

2.2.1 Title Page (Not included in 125 page limit) 1

2.2.2 Team List (See Attach 2.0)(Not included in 125 page

limit)

2.2.8 Requirements Correlation Matrix Unlimited

2.2.9 Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2.10 List of Tables and Figures (Including IMS/IMP/ACAs

and FAA Certification Plan)

Unlimited

2.2.11 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms Unlimited

3.0* Technical (Factor 1) SF1 Aircraft & Simulator Modification Strategy SF2 System Requirements Document (including RFP Attachment D) SF3 Simulator (OFT and PTT) Specific Requirements SF4 Logistics and Planning (Implementation)

4.0 Technical Risk (Factor 2) Included

within the 125 pages above

II 5.0 Past Performance (Factor 3) 4/1

2.2.1 Title Page 1

2.2.2 Team List (See Attach 2.0) 3

2.2.9 Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2.10 List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

2.2.11 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms Unlimited

5.1.3 Consent Letter (See Attach 1.4) See 5.1.3

5.1.3 Client Authorization Letters (See Attach 1.5) See 5.1.3

5.2.2 Past Performance Questionnaires (See Attach 1.2) Tab Only

5.3.1 & 5.3.2

Past Performance Information (PPI) and Relevant Contract Narrative (See Attach 1.1)

Request no more than 13 pages per contract

5.3.3 Roadmap 2

III 6.0 Price Volume (Factor 4) 3/2

2.2.1 Title Page Unlimited

2.2.2 Team List (See Attach 2.0) 3

2.2.9 Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2.10 List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

2.2.11 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms Unlimited

6.7 Section 1 Unlimited

6.7 Section 2 Unlimited

6.7 Section 3 Unlimited

6.7 Section 4 Unlimited

IV 7.0 Contract Documentation 2/1 Unlimited

2.2.1 Title Page Unlimited

2.2.2 Team List (See Attach 2.0) 3

2.2.8 Requirements Correlation Matrix Unlimited

2.2.9 Table of Contents Unlimited

2.2.10 List of Tables and Figures Unlimited

2.2.11 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms Unlimited

7.1 RFP / Model Contract (Sections A-J) N/A

7.1.4 Representations and Certifications (Section K) N/A

7.2 Exceptions/Assumptions Unlimited

7.3.2 Contact Information Unlimited

7.3.5 Attachments to the RFP / Model Contract Unlimited

2.2.4 File Names

Offerors shall submit volumes with the following file names: Volume 1 – Technical.doc, Volume II – PastPerf.doc, Volume III –Price.doc, and Volume IV – Contract.doc.

2.2.5 Page Limitations

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and (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.

Page limits apply to both hard and electronic copies.

2.2.6 Reserved

2.2.7 Cross Referencing

Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation, which is not found in its designated volume, will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted when its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

2.2.8 Requirements Correlation Matrix

The Offeror shall complete the Requirements Correlation Matrix provided in Table 2.2 that will indicate the corresponding proposal paragraph in each volume which addresses the referenced item.

Table 2.2. Requirements Correlation Matrix

Cross Reference SOW Section

RFP

Section

L

Proposal

(Volume

& Para)

Aircraft and Simulator Modification Strategy

A&SM1a – Describe how the proposed solution integrates with the existing legacy system while minimizing disturbances to the legacy systems. For disturbed systems, describe how the solution will ensure electrical and data compatibility between T-

1A modified aircraft and legacy systems, as well as modified simulator (OFT and PTT) and legacy systems.

Section 6.6

Paragraph 3 and 4

3.2.3

A&SM1b – Describe how approach will utilize COTS components in the T-1A avionics suite to facilitate future system growth and describe how the proposed solution has demonstrated a Technology Readiness Level of 8 on a

Beechcraft 400A or equivalent aircraft.

Section 3

Paragraph 1 3.2.3

A&SM1c – Describe how software development will be in accordance with the Design Assurance Level specified by the

System Safety Assessment, provide the software verification approach to ensure that any developed software enables enhanced system performance, maintainability, interoperability, portability, reliability and user-friendly methods of operation.

Section 9

Paragraph 1, 3 and 4

3.2.3

A&SM1d – Describe how the offeror will obtain required ACA’s with suppliers and OEMs for all required components to satisfy contractual expectations related to required intellectual property.

Section 4

Paragraph 4 3.2.3

A&SM1e – Describe how the proposed solution will be FAA certified for use within twelve (12) months of contract award.

Section 3

Paragraph 1 3.2.3

System Requirements Document

SRD2a – Provide a statement that all MANDATORY SRD requirements will be met.

Section 3

Paragraph 2 3.2.4

SRD2b – Complete table briefly describing how individual SRD requirements identified in RFP Attachment D are met without any mitigation

Section 3

Paragraph 2 3.2.4

Simulator (OFT and PTT) Specific Requirements

SSR3a – Describe how the offeror will obtain required ACA’s with simulator Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) contractor.

Section 8

Paragraph 1 3.2.5

SSR3b – Describe the proposed approach to modify the two prototype OFTs and PTTs in accordance with the IMS.

Section 8 Paragraph 2

3.2.5

Logistics and Planning (Implementation)

LP4a – Describe how the proposed solution will ensure an FAA

Certification Plan that includes the minimum requirements of

SOW Section 6.3.1.

Section 6.3.1 3.2.6

LP4b – Describe how the approach ensures the appropriate level of staffing of qualified and certified personnel are available to support all aspects of the AMP program.

Section 4.4

Paragraph 1 3.2.6

LP4c – Describe how the approach will ensure the identification of long-lead time material/parts.

Section 5.6

Paragraph 2 3.2.6

LP4d – Describe how the approach ensures technical order data will be developed and provided for the modified T-1A aircraft and modified OFT and PTT devices IAW TO 00-5-3.

Section 10

Paragrah 2 and Section

10.6

3.2.6

LP4e – Describe how the proposed facility is FAA Part 145 compliant and associated airfield will support safe aircraft operations IAW AFI 11-2T-1V3 section 3. In addition, describe how maintenance facilities will accommodate no less than six (6) in-dock modifications at any one time.

Section 3.5 3.2.6

Technical Risk

Describe all technical risks 4.0

Past Performance

Price

2.2.9 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

2.2.10 Tables and Figures

Include an indexed list of Tables and Figures.

2.2.11 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

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

2.3 Page Size and Format

2.3.1 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 Arial 12 font. 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 ENs. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

2.3.2 Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated 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 Arial 8 font. 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.

2.4 Binding and Labeling

Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring, loose-leaf binder permitting the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the Offerors name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. All unclassified document binders shall have a color other than red or other applicable security designation colors. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

2.5 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 written hard copies will take precedence in all cases. For electronic copies, indicate on each Compact Disc Read Only Memory (CD-ROM) the volume number and title. Use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including subfactors, required plans, exhibits, appendices, and attachments, if any. The

Offeror shall submit volumes I through IV in electronic format. Each volume shall be submitted on a separate CD-ROM. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or 2010, MS Excel 2007 or 2010, MS-Project 2007 or 2010, and MS-Power Point 2007 or 2010.

2.6 Distribution

The "original" proposal shall be clearly identified. Proposals shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer and mailed to:

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OFFICE: AFLCMC/WLKA

ATTN: Mr. Ronald A Hobbs

3001 Staff Dr., Post 1AE1103C Tinker AFB OK 73145-3020 Telephone: 405-736-7124 Ronald.Hobbs@us.af.mil

3.0 Factor 1 – Technical

3.1 General

The Technical Volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. 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 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 proposal. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

3.2 Format and Specific Content

3.2.1 Technical

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

3.2.2 Volume Organization

The Technical Volume shall be organized according to the outline provided in Table 2.1.

3.2.3 Subfactor 1: Aircraft and Simulator Modification Strategy The Offeror shall provide an approach to the AMP Aircraft and Simulator modification strategy. As a minimum, the approach shall address the following criteria:

mailto:Ronald.Hobbs@us.af.mil

a) Provide approaches for i. and ii. below describing how the proposed solution integrates with the existing legacy system while minimizing disturbances to the legacy systems. For disturbed systems describe the following:

i. The electrical and data compatibility between T-1A modified aircraft and legacy systems

ii. The electrical and data compatibility between modified simulator (OFT and PTT) and legacy systems

(SOW Section 6.6, Paragraphs 3 and 4)

b) Provide approach that will utilize COTS components in the proposed T-1A avionics suite that has a Technology Readiness Level of 8 on a Beechcraft 400A or equivalent aircraft (SOW Section 1.2 Paragraph 2, and SOW Section 3, Paragraph 1).

c) Provide separate Software Verification Plan approaches for i. and ii.

below. As a minimum the approaches must address all elements of CDRL A042. In addition, the offeror shall address how developed software enables enhanced system performance, maintainability, interoperability, portability, reliability and user-friendly methods of operation. (SOW Section 9, Paragraphs 3 and 4).

i. Aircraft

ii. Simulator

d) Provide a valid Associated Contractor Agreement (ACA). If the offeror does not have an ACA, the offeror shall provide letters of intent and describe how the offeror will obtain required ACAs with suppliers and OEMs for all required components (SOW Section 4, Paragraph 4). Note:

Offeror is not required to provide entire ACA or Letter of Intent documentation. The offeror must provide adequate information to demonstrate a bilateral understanding between the parties (for example ACA title page/executive summary and signature page).

e) Provide an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that includes planned events and milestones, accomplishments, exit criteria, and activities from contract award to the completion of the contract.

(SOW Section 4.1 and Appendix E).

3.2.4 Subfactor 2: System Requirement Document (SRD)

The Offeror shall provide an approach that meets all MANDATORY SRD requirements.

As a minimum, the approach shall address the following criteria:

a) Provide a statement that all MANDATORY SRD requirements will be met

b) Provide an approach that addresses how each requirement identified in the

SRD Evaluation Table (RFP Attachment D) will be met.

3.2.5 Subfactor 3: Simulator (OFT and PTT) Specific Requirements The Offeror shall provide an approach to modify T-1A simulators. As a minimum, the approach shall address the following criteria:

a) Provide a valid ACA with the simulator Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) contractor. If the offeror does not have an ACA, the offeror shall provide a letter of intent and describe how the offeror will obtain required ACAs (SOW Section 8, Paragraph 1). Note: Offeror is not required to provide entire ACA or Letter of Intent documentation. The offeror must provide adequate information to demonstrate a bilateral understanding between the parties (for example ACA title page/executive summary and signature page).

b) Provide an approach to modify the two prototype OFTs and PTTs no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to delivery of the first modified aircraft to that Maintenance Operating Base (MOB) in accordance with the IMS (SOW Section 8).

3.2.6 Subfactor 4: Logistics and Planning (Implementation)

The Offeror shall provide an approach for logistics and planning. As a minimum, the plan shall address the following criteria:

a) Provide an FAA Certification Plan that meets the minimum requirements of SOW Section 6.3.1 including certification within 12 months.

b) Provide an approach for an appropriate level of staffing of qualified and certified personnel to support all aspects of the AMP program (SOW Section 4.4, Paragraph 1).

c) Provide an approach to identify long-lead time material/parts and describe an approach to manage these items to meet schedule (SOW Section 5.6, Paragraph 2 and Appendix B).

d) Provide an approach to identify, develop and provide technical order data for the prototype T-1A aircraft and prototype OFT and PTT devices IAW TO 00-5-3 to meet schedule (SOW Section 10, paragraph 2).

e) Provide the following:

i. A valid FAA Part 145 certificate for the proposed facility

ii. An approach describing how the airfield will support safe aircraft operations IAW AFI 11-2T-1V3 section 3

iii. A description how maintenance facilities will accommodate no less than six (6) in-dock modifications at any one time (SOW Section 3.5).

4.0 Factor 2 – Technical Risk

The Offeror shall address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of the Offerors proposed technical approach for Technical subfactors 1, 2, 3 and 4 (elements a & e)..

The Offeror shall address all Technical Risk that the Offeror considers to have potential for disruption to schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The Offeror shall describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of the risk’s potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of contract requirements (for example, SOW requirements), whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. For each risk the Offeror identifies, the Offeror shall outline how that risk is eliminated or reduced to a manageable level in the proposed mitigation plan. The Offeror shall identify and classify any new risks introduced as a result from any proposed risk mitigations or workarounds identified.

5.0 Factor 3 – Past Performance

5.1 General

5.1.1 The Offeror shall address Past Performance associated with those aspects of the Offerors proposed technical approach for Factor 1 Technical; Subfactor 1, Aircraft and Simulator Modification Strategy, Subfactor 2, System Requirements Document, Subfactor 3, Simulator (OFT and PTT) Specific Requirements, and Subfactor 4, Logistics and Planning (Implementation).

5.1.2 Each Offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Attachment

1.1. This information is required on the Offeror and significant subcontractor/teaming partner (performing over 5% of the total proposed contract value) AW Paragraph 5.3.1.

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.

5.1.3 Along with the information required in this paragraph, the Offeror shall submit a consent letter (Attachment 1.4) 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 (Attachment 1.5) authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offerors performance.

5.2 Early Proposal Information

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

5.2.2 As soon as practicable, Offerors shall complete Section 1 of the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 1.2) and e-mail it and the Performance Questionnaire Letter (Attachment 1.3) to all points of contacts (POCs) the Offeror has listed in the Past Performance Information (PPI) tool (Attachment 1.1). The POCs will complete the questionnaires and forward them by E-mail, directly to the Past Performance Evaluation Team (PPET). E-mail Ronald.Hobbs@us.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 PPET will conduct such follow-up with any POC as necessary.

5.3 Relevant Contracts

5.3.1 Request each Offeror submit up to three (3) PPI contracts for the prime Contractor and up to two (2) for each significant subcontractor/teaming partner (performing over 5% of the total proposed contract value).

NOTE: The requested number of PPI contracts for the prime and subcontractors are preferences, and not requirements. Offerors may submit more than the preferred number, if the offeror believes the extra contracts are needed to fully describe their relevancy. Offerors who submit less than the preferred number of PPI contracts are not automatically assigned an “Unknown Confidence” rating. Fewer numbers may be acceptable if the Government determines there is sufficient information to determine a confidence rating. Please only submit information on significant subcontractor/teaming partner (performing over 5% of the total proposed contract value) performing key or critical portions of the T-1A AMP effort. There is no limit on the number of PPI contracts allowed per team; however, Offerors are requested to limit responses to those efforts necessary for evaluation and relevant to the T-1A AMP effort. Request each PPI contract (or effort) not exceed 13 pages, although more or less may be submitted, if necessary and relevant to the T-1A AMP effort.

NOTE: Printed hard copies of the pages generated from the PPI tool are subject to the limitations outlined in this paragraph.

5.3.2 PPI Relevant Contract Narrative

Offerors shall provide a narrative explaining what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate.

This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the Offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a limited or no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an Offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The Offeror 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.

Categorize the relevance information into the specific technical subfactors and Price assessment used to evaluate the proposal. The offeror is requested to limit the narrative to a maximum of 5 pages. However, the offeror may exceed the requested page limit, if determined necessary to fully describe relevancy.

5.3.3 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, Offerors shall include a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of the Offerors company. 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.

6.0 Factor 4 – Price

6.1 In the price volume, the Offeror shall provide the following information in addition to the pricing in Price Matrix, Attachment C of the solicitation. These instructions are to assist you in submitting information required to evaluate the reasonableness, balance, and realism of your proposed price. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal.

6.2 General Instructions

Information beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your 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 Price Volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation pertaining to pricing be included elsewhere in the proposal (except Attachment C, Price Matrix, which will be included in the Contract Volume). Pricing information in Schedule B and the Price Matrix, Attachment C is the only Price information that shall be included in Contract Documentation (Volume IV).

6.2.1 The quantity data given in the Estimated Quantities Table (Section M, paragraph 2.5.6) represent estimates of the T-1A Avionics Modification to be completed during specific periods of performance. All such quantities will be used for evaluation purposes only and do not obligate the Government to exercise or guarantee such quantities or prices during the contract performance period.

6.2.2 Price Reasonableness, Balance, and Price Realism

Offerors proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness (including completeness) balance, and price realism. Unreasonable or unrealistic proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the Offeror does not understand the requirement. Additionally, unbalanced pricing may pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may render an Offerors proposal ineligible for award. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their price reasonableness, balance, and price realism. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the Offeror.

6.2.2.1 Price Reasonableness

Reasonableness is based on an overall evaluated proposed price and must represent a price to the Government a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through proposal analysis techniques. For completeness, Offerors must provide unit prices for all listed items. Incomplete proposals (without required unit prices) may render an Offerors proposal ineligible for award. To assist in the price reasonableness assessment Offerors are required to provide supporting explanation/rationale as outlined in this ITO.

6.2.2.2 Balanced Pricing

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

Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonable prices. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable Total Evaluated Price (TEP), the price of one or more CLIN 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 price to the Government, even though it is the lowest TEP. Also, an offer could be so grossly unbalanced that an acceptance of the offer would be tantamount to allowing an advanced payment.

Balanced pricing is determined with respect to separately priced CLINs or SubCLINs, or quantity ranges within a CLIN, or significant unexplained variance in pricing from year to year.

To assist the determination of balanced pricing, Offerors shall complete the attached Price Matrix, Attachment C. Completion of the Price Matrix allows efficient comparison of proposed pricing with the SOW requirements. If what happens to be unbalanced pricing is due to sound rationale associated with, for example, the proposal’s technical approach, Offerors shall provide an explanation to account for any pricing that appears unbalanced.

6.2.2.3 Price Realism

Proposed pricing must demonstrate adequate understanding of the requirement and that the proposed pricing does not pose a risk to performance. Proposed pricing shall be realistic for the work required. The Government will evaluate proposals for price realism to determine whether proposed prices are based on adequate understanding of contract requirements. Offerors shall provide sufficient rationale describing how prices were developed (such as assumptions, historical data, projections, expertise, management decisions, etc)

6.2.3 Pricing Information Requirements

FAR Part 15 applies regarding price analysis as a basis for determining reasonable and balanced pricing. Additional information is not requested nor desired by the Government. However, if the Offeror believes additional data other than certified cost or pricing data is necessary to justify or clarify proposed pricing, it may be included in the Price Volume.

In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b), prices based on adequate price competition do not require submission of certified cost or pricing data. In accordance with FAR 15.403- 3(a), however, data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. FAR 15.403-3(a)(1) provides for obtaining data other than certified cost or pricing data if needed to determine price reasonableness. Therefore, the FAR does not preclude the requirement for obtaining data other than certified cost or pricing data under certain circumstances and the Government reserves the right to obtain data as appropriate.

Should the CO determine proposed prices appear unreasonable or unrealistic, the Offerors may be required to support price reasonableness via data other than certified cost or pricing data. 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 certified cost or pricing data.

Offerors shall complete the Price Matrix, Attachment C. Offerors must ensure all required proposed pricing is provided in the Price Matrix. All periods of performance must be priced. This includes the eighteen month Basic Period (includes LRIP) and six

(6) one-year Option Periods.

Any omission of required pricing may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. An incomplete Price Matrix will be considered unreasonable since pricing completeness is part of the price reasonableness criteria.

Proposed unit prices will be evaluated using estimated quantities consisting of estimates provided by the Government per year. These estimates are for evaluation purposes only and do not guarantee any level of effort or buy quantities after contract award.

6.2.4 Rounding

All proposed dollar amounts shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. However, hourly labor rates (fully loaded or burdened) shall be rounded to the nearest cent. Also proposed Material Handling Rates shall be rounded to two decimal places to the right of the decimal point. Additional information is provided in Section 6.3 Pricing Support Information. The Price Matrix format provides for decimal places that must be in accordance with this required decimal format. If any pricing proposal deviates from this format, the Government will apply the specified format to determine the extended pricing and TEP.

6.3 Pricing Support Information

6.3.1 Estimating System

Provide a summary description of the Offeror’s standard estimating system or methods.

Also, identify any deviations from the Offeror’s standard estimating procedures in preparing this proposal volume. Indicate whether the Offeror has Government approval of the Offeror’s system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

6.3.2 Purchasing System

Provide a summary description of the Offeror’s purchasing system or methods (e.g., how material requirements are determined, how sources are selected, when firm quotes are obtained, what provisions are made to ensure quantity and other discounts). Also, identify any deviations from the Offeror’s standard procedures in preparing this proposal. Indicate whether the Offeror has Government approval of the system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

6.3.3 Accounting System

Provide a summary of the Offeror’s accounting system or methods. Indicate whether the Offeror has Government Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) approval of the accounting system and if so, provide evidence of such approval. Also, identify any deviations from the Offeror’s standard procedures in preparing this proposal.

6.3.4 Explanation of Specific Estimating Techniques and Methods Explain the methodology used to estimate costs/prices in the development of the Offeror’s proposed pricing. A variety of estimating techniques and methods are acceptable as a basis of estimate in proposed pricing. When responding to the Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the Offeror and associated subcontractors may use any generally acceptable estimating techniques consistent with the Offerors Disclosure Statement as appropriate, and if required based on current contracts per Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) policy and guidance. Acceptable contemporary estimating methods can include Cost-to-Cost and Cost-to- Non-Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs), commercially available parametric price models, in-house developed parametric price models, commercial catalogs, etc. The Government reserves the right to obtain information from the Contract Business Analysis Repository (CBAR) as considered necessary.

6.3.5 Past Experience Basis of Estimate

Where price estimates are based on past experience, identify the past experience;

explain how the past experience relates to the current effort including similarities and differences and how price data available from the past experiences was adapted to the current effort pricing.

6.3.6 Price Assumptions Used in Development of Proposed Pricing Information to support reasonableness of proposed pricing is required including supporting data and estimating methodology. All significant assumptions (including indirect rates for the Offerors appropriate accounting period, volume or location discounts), scope limitations and/or qualifications of the pricing proposal shall be addressed and explained.

6.3.7 Contractor Furnished Property/Equipment/Tooling/Material (CFP/CFE/CFT/

CFM)

It is the Contractor’s responsibility to obtain property, equipment, tooling, and/or material required for performance of this contract.

6.3.8 Proposed Price Reduction per Corporate/Management Decision If estimated prices to perform the proposed effort have been decreased due to a management decision, provide a summary of the reduction by major pricing element (e.g., material, labor, overhead, etc.). Also, provide complete rationale for the reduction.

Provide the estimated dollar and percentage of the reduction, explaining how such reductions are ensured not to increase performance risk to the Government.

6.3.9 Annual Price Changes

Proposed price increases greater than 5% per period shall be verified and addressed for reasonableness as well as balanced pricing in this section.

6.3.10 Proposed Fixed Rates: Hourly Labor Rates for Over & Above (O&A) Labor;

and Material Handling Rates The Price Matrix (Attachment C) includes various O&A CLINs (0007 and X018), which contain rates. Proposed labor rates (e.g., fully burdened hourly labor rates for all types of O&A labor) shall be in accordance with CBAs, as applicable. It should be noted that proposed rates shall be provided for each year of the performance period.

All rates shall be proposed as Fixed-Priced (FP) rates. Fixed-Priced rates are those rates proposed for all performance periods and are considered fixed at the proposed amount. Offerors are to indicate their understanding of proposed ceiling rates, acknowledging that such rates will apply to out-years (period of performance beyond year one of the basic period) in the future despite what current actuals are running at the time.

Similar to Fixed-Priced rates for fully burdened hourly labor rates, Material Factor Rates, shall also be proposed as Fixed-Priced rates. Offerors are to indicate their understanding of proposed Fixed-Priced rates, acknowledging that such rates will apply to out-years (period of performance beyond year one of the basic period) in the future despite what current actuals are running at the time.

6.3.11 O&A Labor Wrap Rates

CLIN 0007 and CLIN X018 (O&A Labor) shall each consist of one fully burdened, loaded wrap rate per year consisting of all labor designated in the CLIN description from Schedule B of the model contract in the RFP. These wrap rates proposed separately by CLIN for O&A tasks associated with these CLINs are required to be consistent with the SOW.

These O&A labor wrap rates shall be proposed at sufficient dollar amounts to adequately cover any and all fluctuations in actual costs in out-years. This includes actuals for prime or any and all subcontractors selected to perform the effort in contract out-years of performance. This includes any and all possible changes in subcontractors after contract award. All rates should be proposed with sufficiently high ceiling labor rates to ensure adequate coverage of all labor costs, all indirect costs and profit in every contract out-year.

The basis of estimate used to develop O&A wrap rates should be provided in sufficient detail to show how these wrap rates were developed for CLINs 0007 and X018.

Development of these CLINs should be provided separately for each CLIN with one example sufficient to illustrate all labor categories were considered and included. If a cost breakdown best shows how these rates were developed, cost element details such as indirect rates, fringe benefits, and profit are acceptable but not required if wrap rate development can be explained without labor rate cost breakdown.

Fixed-Priced labor wrap rates proposed inappropriately low will be considered at risk for jeopardizing a determination of price realism. Offerors are cautioned against bidding any low proposed pricing with the intention of raising pricing after contract award.

Offerors shall be aware all proposed pricing including fully loaded labor wrap rates shall be all inclusive, taking into account uncertainties such as pricing fluctuations, changes in designed subcontractors/vendors and any actual out-year increases in accounting pools in out-years. Unknowns at the time of proposal submission must be taken into account and adequately accounted for in proposed pricing of contract performance out-years as part of contractor risk of proposing fixed priced or firm, fixed priced CLINs.

Offerors shall provide a breakout of these fully burdened labor wrap rates showing all labor types included. These labor wrap rates shall also represent all indirect costs plus associated profit and shall be considered ceiling rates. These rates shall be adequately priced to include all contractor risk associated with proposing in contract out-years.

6.3.12. Probable Subcontractors and Subcontractor Pricing

Submit a list of the proposed probable subcontractors and inter-divisional transfers showing (a) the supplier, (b) description of effort, and (c) type of contract.

Include a detailed explanation of your determination of proposed subcontractor or vendor pricing considered fair and reasonable. As prime contractor, documentation is required to demonstrate subcontractor/vendor commercial quotes are considered fair and reasonable. Include a detailed description of your process for evaluating subcontractor/vendor pricing in your determination of fair and reasonable pricing.

Offerors are required to provide an explanation of how indirect costs (Including Material Handling costs), G&A and profit are applied to subcontractor proposal cost/pricing and whether all subcontractor costs, including indirect rates (particularly Material Handling rates), G&A, and profit are included as a total subcontract amount (i.e., prime treats all subcontractor/vendor costs as their direct cost to which the prime applies their own indirect costs, G&A, cost of money (COM) and profit). Also, include an explanation of your determination to utilize “make” or “buy” subcontractor or vendor parts.

6.4. Government Field Support Agencies

Identify the cognizant DCAA and DCMA office responsible for administration of the Offerors Government contracts.

6.5 Other Documentation

Other documentation considered by Offerors to be essential for support of proposed prices…