RVA_Section L.pdf

L-1

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (ITO)

REMOTE VISUAL ASSESSMENT CONTRACTOR LOGISTICS SUPPORT

SOURCE SELECTION

Notice to Offeror(s): Funds are not presently available for this effort. No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are available. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an offeror for any costs.

1.0 PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND OBJECTIVES

1.1 Source Selection

The government intends to select one contractor for the Remote Visual Assessment (RVA) Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) effort. However, the government reserves the right to award no contract if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines it is in the government's best interest. The SSA will consider the government's expected volume of work, available funding, adequate competition, and the availability of Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) proposals. The government reserves the right to award the contract without discussions.

1.2 Budgeting/Funding Information

Funding will be obligated at time of award for the base period of performance and in future periods for the option years and/or options, if available.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 General Guidance

This section provides general guidance for preparing proposals, as well as specific instructions on format and content. Offeror’s proposal shall include all data and information requested and shall be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Any offeror who submits an incomplete or non-conforming proposal may be considered non-responsive and eliminated from the competition. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), labor categories, Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), and solicitation.

2.2 Proposal Detail

The proposal shall be clear and concise, including sufficient detail for effective evaluation substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the government's requirements. Offerors shall use the PWS and show by citing applicable experience, quality, policies, practices, procedures, standards, software systems, tools, facilities, L-2 plans, or other means of achieving results, exactly how the offeror will accomplish the designated requirements. Offerors shall assume that the government has no prior knowledge of contractor facilities or their experience, and that the government will base its evaluation only on the information presented in an offeror’s proposal

2.3 Documentation

Elaborate brochures, excessive documentation, bound volumes, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

2.4 Acceptance Period

The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the solicitation. Offerors providing less than the specified number of calendar days for government acceptance after the date offers are due may be considered non-responsive and may be eliminated.

2.5 Proposal Files

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (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.

2.6 Point of Contact

The contracting officer (CO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns that you may have to the CO. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO at the address below:

AFNWC/PZBA

Attn: Jaime Veglia 6008 Wardleigh Road, Bldg. 1580, Room 127 Hill AFB, UT 84056 Office (801) 775-3699 jaime.veglia.1@us.af.mil

2.7 Pre-Award 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.

2.8 Post-Award Debriefings

The CO will notify unsuccessful offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may mailto:jaime.veglia.1@us.af.mil

L-3 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.

2.9 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. The offeror shall also state remedies that 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.

2.10 Electronic Reference Documents

All reference documents for this solicitation are available via the Bidders’ Library. The Bidder’s Library is available through the DOD SAFE Site access. To obtain the Bidder’s Library, offerors must request access no later than three business days after the release of the RFP. Requests should be submitted via email IAW paragraph 2.6 and include Ms. Allison Ianniello at allison.ianniello.1@us.af.mil. Offerors must include in the email a current DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement. Note that the reference documents will only be released to the Data Custodian listed in the DD 2345.

2.11 Oral Presentations

Oral presentations will not be allowed.

2.12 Amendments to Solicitation

If this Request for Proposal (RFP) is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this request by the date and time specified in the amendment(s) by signing and returning the front page of each.

2.13 Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals Proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in both paper and electronic formats to the address located in paragraph 2.6 of this document, showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror. Late proposals will only be considered In Accordance With (IAW) FAR 15.208. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the government installation includes the time and date stamp of that installation on the proposal wrapper, other documentary evidence of receipt maintained by the installation, or oral testimony or statements of government personnel. Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before award. Proposals may also be withdrawn in person by an offeror or an authorized representative, if the identity of the person requesting the withdrawal is established and the person signs a receipt for the proposal before award.

2.14 Organization, Number of Copies and Page Limits

The title page of each volume must show:

mailto:allison.ianniello.1@us.af.mil

L-4

2.14.1 Solicitation Number

2.14.2 Company name, address, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code and Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS)

2.14.3. Primary point of contact name, telephone number and email address

2.14.4. Volume number and name (e.g. Volume I, Price) and copy number (i.e., Original, copy 1, copy 2, etc.)

2.14.5. The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization in Table 1. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table and shall be within the required page limits and give the number of copies specified. The contents of each proposal volume are described in detail later in this document.

Table 1 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME

SECTION L

PARAGRAPH

TITLE

COPIES

PAGE LIMIT

I

3.0

Price Volume

Pricing Matrix

Original plus 1 hardcopy (Total 2 hardcopies), and 2 CDs

Unlimited

II

4.0

Technical Volume

50 pages

III

5.0

Past Performance

15 pages

L-5

IV

6.0

1) Contract Documentation

Contract Document:

Unlimited

2.15 Page Limitations

This limit shall be treated as a firm maximum. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Each page shall be counted, except the following:

blank pages, title pages, tables of contents, tabs, glossaries, Cross Reference Matrix, and those noted in the Proposed Organization Table as “Unlimited.” Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if applicable. The specified page limit for EN responses will be identified in the letter(s) forwarding the EN(s) to the offeror.

2.16 Pricing Information

All pricing information shall be addressed only in the Price Volume.

2.17 Cross Referencing

Each volume shall be written on a standalone basis so contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation that 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. The offeror shall fill out a cross reference matrix in the format shown in Attachment 1, indicating the proposal reference information as it relates to the Section L – Instructions to Offerors, and Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award. This shall be included in the Technical Volume (Volume II). The cross reference matrix addresses each requirement within the PWS and subfactors. The offeror shall fill in each section independently labeled with the appropriate paragraph number or page number from their proposal that addresses the requirement or subfactor.

2.18 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. Include an indexed list of tables and figures. Tables and figures do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

2.19 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronym

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

L-6

2.20 Page Size and Format

A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Sheets shall be double-sided which will count as two pages.

Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text shall be Times New Roman, font size shall be no less than 12 points and lines shall be single spaced. 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, bottom, and each side. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume starting with title page. These page format restrictions shall also apply to responses to ENs if applicable. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals. Text in electronic documents shall be searchable.

Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems, layouts, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, be printed only on one side, 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. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 10 point. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

2.21 Binding and Labeling

Each volume of the proposal should be provided separately in a three-ring, loose-leaf binder large enough to permit the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. The outside of each binder shall include a cover sheet, clearly marked with the volume number and title, copy number, solicitation identification and the offeror's name. The same identifying data shall be placed on the spine of each binder. Ensure inclusion of all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

2.22 Electronic Offers

The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. In the event there is a discrepancy between the hard copy and electronic copy, the hard copy shall take precedence. For electronic copies, indicate on each CD the volume number and title. Use separate files for each volume to permit rapid location of all portions, including subfactor required plans, exhibits, annexes, and attachments if any. The offeror shall submit all Volumes in electronic format, using read-only Compact Discs (CDs) (i.e., CD-R). Re-writable CDs (i.e.

CD-RW) shall not be used. Each volume shall be on a separate CD. 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 2010, MS Excel 2010, MS Project 2010 and MS PowerPoint 2010, as applicable. Portable Document Format (PDF) formats are acceptable but must be searchable or cannot be used.

2.23 Distribution

L-7

The "original" proposal shall be identified. Proposals shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer and mailed or hand-delivered to the CO as identified in 2.6.

2.24 Use of Non-Government Advisors

Offerors are advised that data submitted to the Government in response to this solicitation will be released to individuals who work for the following company as non-Government advisors for review and analysis.

Company Name Address BAE Systems Inc. 6008 Wardleigh Rd Bldg. 1580

Hill Air Force Base, UT 84056

2.24.1 Limitations

Per DOD Source Selection Procedures, paragraph 1.4.6.2.2, Nongovernment advisors may assist in and provide input regarding the evaluation, but they may not determine ratings or rankings of offerors’ proposals. Use of nongovernment personnel as voting members of the SSEB or SSAC (if convened) is prohibited. (FAR 7.503(c) (12) (ii)).

Disclosure of past performance information to nongovernment personnel is strictly prohibited (see “Guidance for the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)”). Accordingly, nongovernment advisors shall not participate in the review and evaluation of past performance information (see FAR 42.1503(d)).

2.24.2 The individuals participating in the review and analysis of proposals have signed individual non-disclosure agreements with the Government which strictly prohibits any release or disclosure of information outside of the Source Selection Team.

2.24.3 Offerors shall follow and complete the instruction in Section K.001 – Use of Non- Government Advisors, of the solicitation.

3.0 VOLUME I – COST/PRICE (Factor One)

3.1 Purpose: IAW FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), data other than certified cost or pricing data will be required within this volume to support determination of price reasonableness. This section is to assist you in submitting data other than certified cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness, balance, and realism (where identified) of your proposed cost/price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. Note that unrealistically low or high proposed costs or prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition. Elimination may be on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or has submitted an unrealistic proposal. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the offeror. The purpose of the pricing volume is to provide the evaluators

L-8 a thorough understanding of the offeror’s price proposal development. The pricing volume should be in a Basis of Estimate (BOE) format as mentioned in 3.10 of this Volume. . The professional employee compensation plan required by FAR 52.222-46 shall be submitted as a part of Volume I. The plan shall set forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for professional employees and include supporting information to enable the Government to review the proposed salaries and fringe benefits in accordance with FAR 52.222-46. Note: The compensation plan pertains to the offeror only. However, if a populated joint venture is formed (a joint venture in which the employees are employed by the joint venture itself and not by any individual joint venture partner), the joint venture must submit the professional employee compensation plan for the joint venture. If an unpopulated joint venture is formed, each individual joint venture partner must submit its own professional employee compensation plan.

3.2 Evaluation: The price evaluation criteria consists of: (1) Completeness, (2) Price Reasonableness, (3) Balance, (4) Realism, and (5) Total Evaluated Price (TEP), as defined in Section M of the RFP. Offerors shall review Section M criteria to ensure that the minimum requirements are met.

3.3 TEP Pricing Matrix (See Attachment in Section J): Offerors shall populate the pricing and cost cells as appropriate in the attached TEP Matrix IAW the instructions contained therein.

The government will use this matrix to calculate the TEP. Travel costs shall be estimated based on PWS requirements; however, travel will not included in the TEP.

3.4 Labor and Spares/Material Pricing: The labor (CPFF) and spares/material (CRNF) should be broken down with sufficient detail to ensure sustainment costs are sufficient to meet the performance requirements in PWS section 3.25 Proposals should include annual proposed costs based on the following RVA CLS annual sustainment support assumptions:

• On average, there are 7,000 maintenance tickets annually across all three wings and NOC/SOC o Of these, on average 800 are video failures, which are the highest priority for repair

The proposal and BOEs should include technical proposal and technical description demonstrating compliance with the PWS.

3.5 Labor-Rate Matrix: The offeror shall populate the Labor-Rate Matrix (See Attachment in Section J) IAW the instructions therein. Submit a copy of the completed Labor-Rate Matrix in the Price Volume (Volume I) in Microsoft Excel format (non-PDF).

3.6 Optional Tasks: Optional Tasks are Firm-Fixed-Price studies listed in PWS sections 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4 and 1.2.5 (CLIN 5001, 5002, 5003, 5004, 5005) shall be proposed using rates and categories included in the Fixed-Price-Labor-Rate Matrix (See Attachment in Section J).

The offeror will include a breakout of hours applied against labor rates and any other direct costs to verify that labor rates were used IAW the Fixed-Price-Labor-Rate Matrix.

L-9

3.7 Cost or Pricing Information Requirements: In accordance with FAR 15.403-3(a), information other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. If, after receipt of proposals, the Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) determines that there is insufficient information available to determine the reasonableness of the proposed pricing, the offeror shall be required to submit additional information other than certified cost or pricing data. If, during the source selection process, the PCO determines that adequate competition no longer exists, then certified cost and pricing data may be required.

Information shall be provided in a format that is in accordance with FAR 15.403-5.

3.8 Pricing Assumptions: Summarize all significant pricing assumptions, scope limitations, and/or qualifications of the Price Volume. List each exception to the ground rules and assumptions provided in the solicitation and each qualification of the Cost/Price Volume, if any.

Provide complete rationale for any exceptions that are taken.

3.9 Estimating Techniques and Methods: When responding to the Cost/Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the offeror and associated subcontractors are encouraged to provide any data/information deemed necessary to assist the government evaluators in understanding the proposal. Any general 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.), may be used to develop estimates. If necessary, reasonable and supportable allocation techniques may be used to spread hours and/or costs to lower levels of WBS.

3.10 Basis of Estimate (BOE): For all cost-type CLINs, discuss the methods used to propose each cost element as well as the basis for all proposed values. The offeror shall include any internal investments that it is making as part of this effort IAW Table 2.0 below.

3.10.1 BOE Format: The offeror shall submit a spreadsheet (see Table 2.0), with content substantially the same as the Sample BOE Summary, attached in Section J, in support of the proposed price for the prime offeror with separate submissions for all major subcontractors/suppliers/interdivisional orders to third level Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) detail. The contractor shall show base labor rates, labor hours, spares/materials (if applicable), a breakout of all indirect rates applied and fee. The offeror shall ensure compliance with the statutory requirements of FAR 15.404-4(c) (4) (i) with regard to fixed-fee. The offeror may provide costs at a lower level to better reflect the level at which the estimate was developed.

Subcontractors/suppliers/interdivisional orders may submit their information directly to the government if they so desire. The offeror may tailor the spreadsheet as needed to fit the offeror’s standard practices and proposal, but shall provide as much information as possible. The offeror shall also reference where in its cost/price proposal the basis for these elements are found. The cost/price models data file shall be in MS-Excel format including all formulas. Additionally, the offeror shall provide the rationale behind proposed labor hours, labor mix, and any spares/material considered major (defined as spares/material with a unit cost greater than

L-10

$5,000). The organization of this BOE shall follow the offeror’s technical proposal, and be arranged in a logical fashion.

Table 2.0 Sample CLIN X001 WBS X.X.1

3.10.2 BOE Format To be sufficiently detailed, the BOEs must include the following elements at a minimum for the prime and all major subcontractors/interdivisional orders:

1). WBS number and title 2). PWS requirement being addressed and the technical activities required to meet each.

3). Labor hours by rate category, labor rates by category, and extended labor cost for each category, along with a total labor cost. A BOE shall be included, giving the rationale for the hours, labor distribution, and rates proposed.

4). A Material BOE including a Priced Bill of Material (PBOM) by CLIN by WBS with rationale for all material items with an extended value (quantity X unit cost) exceeding $5,000.

5). Other direct costs with a BOE and rationale for those costs.

6). For all indirect costs, provide a BOE for the proposed rates and the base cost categories for the application of those rates.

7). If facilities capital cost of money (FCCM, or COM) is proposed, provide a BOE for the proposed bases and factors proposed.

8). No separate breakout is required for all subcontractors/suppliers/interdivisional orders however, the determination and rationale supporting a finding of fair and reasonable prices shall be included. Subcontractors/suppliers/interdivisional orders solely providing material may be included above with the material BOE portion.

9). Provide rationale for the proposed fee rate. FCCM/COM must not be included in the base for profit.

L-11

10). Crosschecks and supporting data, if any, used to validate the realism of the estimate.

11). Any areas identified for priced efficiency or risk along with the basis for any adjustments and planned risk mitigation, as applicable.

3.11 Accounting System: Because a portion of the contemplated contract type is other than Fixed-Price, the Offeror must provide evidence of an approved accounting system for themselves and any subcontractors who will be issued other-than fixed price subcontracts. If not, the offeror will be required to return a pre-award survey as part of the solicitation documents. If an offeror’s accounting system has been disapproved in whole or in part, they shall provide the status of actions taken to correct noted deficiencies. Also, the contractor shall identify any deviations from their standard procedures in preparing this proposal.

4.0 Volume II – Technical Volume (Factor Two)

4.1 General

The technical volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Offeror’s responses will be evaluated against the technical subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Offerors shall review Section M to ensure the minimum requirements are met. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual approaches (processes/methodologies) and capabilities you would use for accomplishing/satisfying these subfactors. There will be no references to rates or pricing in this volume. Offerors shall assume that the government has no prior knowledge of their experience and certifications, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By the offerors proposal submission, the offeror is affirming that their company/firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is not necessary or desirable to tell us so in the proposal.

4.2 Format and Specific Content

4.2.1 Technical

In the technical volume, address the proposed approach, capabilities, and evidence of meeting performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor. It is imperative that the offeror fully describe and provide detail as to how they shall meet the subfactor requirements.

Do not merely copy and paste, rephrase or restate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. Evidence (which clearly demonstrates and supports the offeror’s claims) is essential. The absence of such evidence may result in a technically unacceptable proposal.

L-12

4.2.2 Volume Organization

The technical volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

Section Title

1 Table of Content 2 List of Tables and Drawings 3 Glossary 4 Cross Reference Matrix 5 Subfactor 1: Engineering Services

5-1 Configuration Management 5-2 Hardware Development/Sustainment 5-3 Software Development/Sustainment 5-4 Failure Analysis 6 Subfactor 2: Maintenance and Support

6-1 Supply Chain Management 6-2 Maintenance Tracking 6-3 Reliability, Availability, Maintainability 6-4 Spare Use and Inventory 7 Subfactor 3: Network and Cybersecurity Operations

7-1 Encrypted Network Management 7-2 Risk Management Framework 8 Subfactor 4: Program Management

8-1 Cost Management Process 8-2 Time Management Process 8-3 Quality Management Process

Note: Offerors shall not address Appendix “C”, Safety, Fire Protection and Health Specification, Industrial Security Requirements of the PWS in their proposal. However, the successful offeror shall be required to obtain 75th Air Base Wing Safety Office approval of their Safety Plan* after contract award.

4.2.3 Technical Subfactors

The technical subfactors* for the Remote Visual Assessment contract are:

Subfactor 1: Engineering Services Subfactor 2: Maintenance and Support Subfactor 3: Network and Cybersecurity Operations Subfactor 4: Program Management

4.2.3.1 Subfactor 1: Engineering Services (PWS 3.25 and sub-paragraphs, 3.11, 3.19, 3.20, 3.21, 3.22) The purpose of this subfactor is to assess the offeror’s approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities to provide a sufficient level of engineering services required to maintain the

L-13

Remote Visual Assessment system from geo-separated locations. This subfactor includes Configuration Management, Hardware Development/Sustainment, Software Development/Sustainment and Failure Analysis. The offeror’s technical proposal shall describe their processes and methodologies for providing the required engineering services.

These processes and methodologies must be sound, feasible, effective, and demonstrate explicit evidence of the full capability and experience their team possesses for performing activities to satisfy or exceed the PWS requirements.

4.2.3.1.1 Configuration Management (PWS 3.7 and sub-paragraphs)

The offeror’s technical proposal shall provide their approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities, detailing how their program team (including subcontractors) will satisfy the following hardware, software/firmware and drawing configuration management requirements. The offeror shall provide explicit evidence that demonstrates the use of the approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities on efforts of similar magnitude and complexity and how it applies to the Remote Visual Assessment requirements.

a. Configuration Identification (PWS 3.7.3, 3.23.3, 3.26.3)

b. Configuration Control (PWS 3.7.2, 3.7.8, 3.9.7, 3.26.4)

c. Configuration Status Accounting (PWS 3.7.8, 3.23.4, 3.23.5, 3.26.3, 3.26.4)

d. Configuration Audits (PWS 3.7.5, 3.7.6, 3.23.4, 3.23.5, 3.26.4)

e. ASME Drawing Standards Proficiency (PWS 3.7.9, 3.7.10)

4.2.3.1.2 Hardware Sustainment (PWS 3.7.8)

capabilities, detailing how their program team (including subcontractors) will satisfy the following hardware development/sustainment requirements. The offeror shall provide explicit evidence that demonstrates the use of the approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities on efforts of similar magnitude and complexity to safely develop, procure, test sustain and resolve hardware issues to ensure uninterrupted operations and how it applies to the Remote Visual Assessment requirements.

a. System Safety (PWS 3.8, 3.10, 3.20, 3.21, 3.22)

b. Parts, Materials, and Maintenance (PWS 3.7.2, 3.13, 3.14, 3.23.3, 3.26, 3.26.1, 3.26.2, 3.26.3)

c. Test and Evaluation (PWS 3.7.7, 3.7.7.1, 3.7.7.2, 3.7.7.3, 3.23.6)

d. Deficiency Identification, Resolution, Implementation, and Documentation

(PWS 3.23.2, 3.25.6)

4.2.3.1.3 Software Sustainment (PWS 3.6, 3.7.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.7.11, 3.11, 3.12) capabilities, detailing how their program team (including subcontractors) will satisfy the following software development/sustainment requirements for non-nuclear software. The

L-14 offeror shall provide explicit evidence that demonstrates the use of the approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities for a networked encrypted surveillance system to develop, sustain, integrate, and test software to ensure uninterrupted operations and how it applies to the Remote Visual Assessment requirements.

a. Development and Modification(PWS 3.4.3, 3.7.3, 3.7.6, 3.7.11, 3.24.5)

b. Anomaly Resolution and Integration (PWS 3.24, 3.24.5)

c. Test and Evaluation (PWS 3.7.7, 3.7.7.1, 3.7.7.2, 3.7.7.3, 3.23.6)

4.2.3.1.4 Failure Analysis (PWS 3.25.6)

capabilities, detailing how their program team (including subcontractors) will satisfy the following failure analysis capabilities. The offeror shall provide explicit evidence that demonstrates the use of the approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities to provide notification of failure to organizations, perform failure determination and resolution to ensure Remote Visual Assessment requirements are met.

a. Organizational Notification (PWS 3.23.2, 3.25.6)

b. Failure Determination (3.25.6)

c. Failure Resolution (PWS 3.25.6)

4.2.3.2 Subfactor 2: Maintenance and Support (PWS 3.27)

The offeror’s shall provide their approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities, detailing how their program team (including subcontractors) will satisfy the following maintenance support requirements. The offeror shall provide explicit evidence that demonstrates the use of the approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities on efforts of similar magnitude and complexity and how it applies to the Remote Visual Assessment requirements.

a. Supply Chain Management (PWS 3.26, 3.26.1, 3.26.2, 3.26.3, 3.26.4)

b. Maintenance Tracking (PWS 3.26.3, 3.26.4, 3.27)

c. Reliability, Availability, Maintainability Process (PWS 3.25.1, 3.25.2, 3.25.3, 3.25.4, 3.25.5, 5.0)

d. Spares Use and Inventory (PWS 3.13, 3.14, 3.4.2, 3.26.1, 3.26.2, 3.26.3, 3.26.4)

4.2.3.3 Subfactor 3: Network and Cybersecurity Operations (3.4.3, 3.9, 3.10, 3.15 and all sub-paragraphs, 3.24 and all sub-paragraphs) The purpose of this subfactor is to assess the offeror’s approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities to provide a sufficient level of network and cybersecurity operations services required to maintain a secure, protected network environment for the Remote Visual Surveillance system. This subfactor includes encrypted network management and Risk Management Framework (RMF). The offeror’s technical proposal shall describe their processes and methodologies for providing the required engineering services. These

L-15 processes and methodologies must be sound, feasible, effective, and demonstrate explicit evidence of the full capability and experience their team possesses for performing activities to satisfy the Remote Visual Assessment system’s network and cybersecurity requirements.

4.2.3.3.1 Encrypted Network Management (PWS 3.15.2)

The offeror shall provide their approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities, detailing how their program team (including subcontractors) will manage a geo-separated network to satisfy or exceed the following encrypted network management requirements. The offeror shall provide explicit evidence that demonstrates the use of the approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities for a networked surveillance system to manage Windows system administrative activities, managing remote host domains, regression testing for software updates, as well as managing a network and security operations center as it applies to the Remote Visual Assessment requirements.

a. Remote System Administration and Network Management (PWS 3.4.4, 3.7.11, 3.9, 3.15.2, 3.23.2, 3.26.3, 3.26.4)

b. Secure Remote Monitoring and Software Updates (PWS 3.7.8, 3.7.11, 3.9, 3.15.1)

c. Test and Evaluation (PWS 3.7.7, 3.7.7.1, 3.7.7.2, 3.7.7.3, 3.23.6)

4.2.3.3.2 Risk Management Framework (PWS 3.15.1)

The offeror shall provide their approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities, detailing how their program team (including subcontractors) will ensure risk management framework is managed for both physical and non-physical controls requirements. The offeror shall provide explicit evidence that demonstrates the use of the approach (processes/methodologies) and capabilities on efforts of similar magnitude and complexity and how it applies to the Remote Visual Assessment requirements.

a. eMASS Proficiency (PWS 3.9, 3.15, 3.15.1, 3.15.2)

b. RMF Process (PWS 3.15, 3.15.1, 3.16, 3.17)

c. Physical and Non-physical Controls (PWS 3.15, 3.15.1, 3.16, 3.17)

d. Approval to Operate, Approval to Connect, and Approving Authority Processes

(PWS 3.15, 3.15.1, 3.15.2, 3.16, 3.17)

4.2.3.4 Subfactor 4: Program Management (PWS 3.1)

The purpose of this subfactor is to assess the offeror’s ability to provide a sufficient level of program management services required to manage the sustainment and acquisition activities for the Remote Visual Assessment program.

L-16

4.2.3.4.1 Cost Management Process (PWS 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.2, 3.3)

capabilities, detailing how they will meet the cost management requirements and provide explicit evidence of following that approach.

4.2.3.4.2 Time Management Process (PWS 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.2, 3.3)

capabilities, detailing how they will meet the time management and earned value management requirements and provide explicit evidence of following that approach.

4.2.3.4.3 Quality Management Process (PWS 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5)

The offeror’s proposal shall provide their capabilities and processes, detailing how they will meet quality management, quality assurance, and quality control requirements and provide and explicit evidence of following these processes.

5.0 VOLUME III- PAST PERFORMANCE (Factor Three)

5.1 General

Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information. This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners. In addition to providing electronic and paper copies as required in Table 1, Offerors shall use the Past Performance Information (PPI) Tool (use latest version from Beta.SAM.gov) in order to electronically submit the PPI portion of the Past Performance Volume. See Attachment 1, EZ Source Instructions for detailed instructions.

The Government will use data provided by each Offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance. *

5.2 Relevant Contracts

Submit information on recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. Also include information on recent contracts performed by each of your teaming partners and significant subcontractors that you consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort. Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance.

5.2.1 Specific Content

Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. 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 an acceptable or unacceptable 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 is required to

L-17 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 relevant information into the specific Mission Capability subfactors and Cost/Price factor used to evaluate the proposal.

5.2.2 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 conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your 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), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

5.3 Recent and Relevant Past Performance

Past performance information can be gathered from offeror submissions, government databases such as the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and/or through the use of government and commercial customer feedback. The offeror is authorized to provide past performance including the number and severity of problems, the effectiveness of any corrective actions taken, and the offeror's overall performance record. Recent performance is defined as current performance and is no more than five years old. The government will not consider performance on contracts or task orders where performance concluded more than five years prior to this solicitation’s issue date. Relevant performance is defined as work that involves approximately the same type(s) of services described in this RFP and offeror should provide performance data from at least two contracts not from AFNWC/NIBN ICBMSD RVA Program Office. The offeror shall not submit more than five contracts for the prime and subcontractor (15-page limitation). The offeror shall address any performance problems or issues as instructed in 5.2 of Section L and explain the corrective action taken and the current status. The government will consider this information, along with information obtained from other sources.

5.4 Performance Problems

Offerors are encouraged to address any performance problems or issues that the government may identify and explain corrective action taken and current status. The government will consider this information in determining the offeror’s past performance rating of acceptable or unacceptable.

L-18

Acceptable past performance would be performance that was found satisfactory. Unacceptable past performance would be performance that is found unsatisfactory.

5.5 Performance Criteria

Past Performance will be used to evaluate an offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet the user’s needs based on a demonstrated record of performance, including cost and schedule. The evaluation will conclude if the performance is technically unacceptable or acceptable. Failure to address performance problems or issues within this volume does not preclude the government from using such information in determining a past performance rating.

Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown.

(See note below.)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a) (2) (IV)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance (see FAR 15.305(a) (2) (IV)). In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

6.0 VOLUME IV- CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION

6.1 Model Contract, Representations and Certifications:

Provide copies in the formats and quantities identified in Table 1.

6.1.1 Section A – Solicitation Contract Form

Complete blocks 12 (offerors must input 180 days for acceptance), 15A, 15B, 16, 17 and 18 of the SF1447. Signature by the offeror on the SF1447 constitutes an offer, which the government may accept.

6.1.2 Section B – Supplies or Services and Costs or Prices

L-19

Offerors are required to input pricing information in Section B of the solicitation. For the purposes of evaluation, all required prices shall be proposed in the TEP Worksheet. If there is a discrepancy between the solicitation and the TEP worksheet, the TEP worksheet will take precedence.

6.1.3 Section I – Contract Clauses

6.1.4 Section K – Representations, certifications, and other statements of offerors Complete representations, certifications, acknowledgments and statements. Offeror must have filled out an online provision 52.204-08 Annual Representations and Certifications (NOV 2011), Online Reps and Certs (ORCA) at https://www.sam.gov.

The offeror shall ensure that tables one (1) – four (4) of the Government Rights in Data (GRID) are filled out completely and correctly IAW the instructions in the GRID document and IAW DFARS clauses 252.227-7013, 252.227-7014, 252.227-7015, and 252.227-7017.

6.1.5 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of Table 3.

Table 3 – Solicitation Exceptions http://www.sam.gov/

L-20

SOLICITATION

Document

Page/

Paragraph

Requirement/

Portion

Rationale

PWS, Model Contract, ITO, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met

6.2 Other Information Required:

6.2.1 Authorized Offeror Personnel

Provide the name, title, telephone number, and email address of the company/division point of contact responsible for negotiating with the government.

6.2.2 Ability to obtain resources

Submit acceptable evidence that your company possesses adequate financial resources to perform the contract. This information will be used as part of the contracting officer’s determination of responsibility IAW FAR 9.104.

6.2.3 Plans Required by Regulation or Policy

Submit applicable Joint Venture Plans in accordance with Table 1 and applicable FAR/DFARS references stated in Section 3.1 of this document. These plans shall be placed in individual binders that are subtitled (e.g., Volume IV, Contract documentation). Provide copies in the formats and quantities identified in Table 1.

L-21

Section L Attachment 1

Instructions to Offerors

Past Performance Information (PPI) for Offerors

Offerors must use the PPI Tool (Use latest version from Beta.SAM.gov) in order to electronically submit the PPI portion of the Past Performance Volume in accordance with the RFP.

Downloading the PPI Tool

The PPI Tool can be downloaded by performing the following steps (if you are unable to download the Tool, contact the contracting officer for assistance):

1. Access the Beta.SAM (https://beta.sam.gov/) website.

2. Find the solicitation posting.

3. Locate the “ppi tool” link from the “All Files” column on the solicitation’s “Notice Details” tab .

4. Select the link and save the “ppi tool” to your computer. Name the file as the prime contractor + RFP number + file extension (e.g. XYZCompanyFA861710R6158.accdb).

Note: PPI Tools saved in Microsoft Office versions 2007 and greater will be saved with “.accdb” file extension.

Entering information in the PPI Tool

After selecting and saving the tool, enter information by performing the following steps:

1. Open the saved PPI Tool.

2. Select the “Options” button from the “Security Warning” banner, if applicable

3. The “Security Alert” pop-up screen displays.

https://beta.sam.gov/

L-22

Note:

Figure 1: Security Alert Pop-up

• Files saved using Microsoft Office 2010 will have the “Enable Content” button on the “Security Warning” banner and therefore will not get a Security Alert pop-up.

• If a "read only" file is opened, in order to populate data in the file, click "Save As" in the "Read-Only" message bar. Enter the filename as the prime contractor + RFP number + file extension (e.g. XYZCompanyFA861710R6158.accdb).

4. Select the radio button “Enable this content” and then click “OK.” A setup pop-up screen displays.

Figure 2: Setup Pop-Up

5. Select the “Start” button. The “Application Setup” screen displays.

Figure 3: Application Setup Screen

L-23

Note: Once the Offeror’s Name and RFP Number have been entered they can be edited by selecting the “Edit Offeror And RFP Number” button from the “Contractor’s Menu”

6. Enter the Offeror’s Name and RFP Number and then click the “Next” button. The application setup continues.

Figure 4: Continue the Application Setup

7. Choose the appropriate option by selecting the corresponding radio button and then click the “Next” button. The “Contractor’s Menu” displays.

Figure 5: Contractor’s Menu

8. Click the “Step 1: Set up Business Relationships” button to create a business relationship, if applicable, for each business entity before proceeding

L-24 throughout the PPI Tool (refer to Section L of the RFP for detailed instructions). Identify all prime and sub-prime organizations and categorize them according to the appropriate role in the proposed acquisition. The “Business Relationships” screen displays.

Figure 6: Business Relationships

9. Click the “New” button to create a business relationship for the proposed acquisition.